PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION COIMBATORE Vs. EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT GOVERNMENT OF INDIA NEW DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FOR the Petitioner: Mr. M. Jayaraman, Mr. M. Venkatachalapathy, SC, Mr. M. Sriram, M/s. Radhagopalan, Mr. S. Ravindran, M/s. T.S. Gopalan, Co. Mr. M. Suresh Kumar, Advocate. FOR the Respondents: R2, Mr. S. Sivakumar, R2, Ms. Rita Chandrasekar, R2, Mr. K. Kalyanasundaram, Mr. S. Ravindran, R2, M/s. T.S. Gopalan, Mr. S. Ravi, M/s. Gupta, Ravi, M/s. S. Arun Kumar M/s. K. Gunasekar, Advocates. Common Order Heard both sides in respect of first batch on 15.06.2011 and on 17.06.2011 in respect of the second batch. The issues involved in all the writ petitions arose out of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short PF Act).

(2.) IN majority of the writ petitions, surprisingly, the petitioner is the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Coimbatore. He has come forward to file the writ petitions aggrieved by the various orders passed by the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal constituted under Section 7D of the PF Act.

(3.) THE Employees' Provident Funds Appellate Tribunal is a judicial Tribunal constituted by the PF Act. It has power to entertain appeals against the order passed by the authority either under Section 7A, or Section 7B, or Section 7C, or Section 14B of the PF Act. THE Tribunal entertained the appeal and while upholding the orders of the PF authorities in levying damages and interest, however reduced the quantum of damages paid by the employer. THE quantum of damages fixed by the Tribunal varied from case to case and it ranged from 5% to 15% per annum depending upon the circumstances pleaded by the employers and also the case put forth by the PF Department.