LAWS(MAD)-2014-10-222

THE COIMBATORE DISTRICT Vs. THE PRESIDING OFFICER

Decided On October 13, 2014
The Coimbatore District Appellant
V/S
THE PRESIDING OFFICER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is aggrieved by the common order dated 10 April 2014 in W.P.Nos. 13213, 13214 and 28629 of 2011, dismissing the writ petitions challenging the orders passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Coimbatore determining the damages payable under Section 14B of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") on account of belated payment of contribution.

(2.) THE appellant is a Society registered under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Co -operative Societies Act. The appellant failed to pay contribution under the Employees Provident Fund Act within the statutory period. There were belated payments in respect of the periods from April, 1997 to February 2002 (W.A.No. 1250/2014), from May 2002 to January 2006 (W.A.No. 1251/2014) and from February 2002 to September 2002 (W.A.No. 1252/2014) respectively. The second respondent passed orders dated 3 December 2013, 15 December, 2006 and 1 September 2005 directing the appellant to remit a sum of Rs.44,14,418/ -, Rs.14,55,098/ - and Rs.21,00,922/ - respectively towards damages under Section 14B of the said Act. The said orders were challenged before this Court. This Court disposed of the writ petitions with a direction to consider the matters afresh. The second respondent once again considered the issues and confirmed the determination of penalty. The said orders were challenged before the first respondent. The first respondent confirmed the orders, but however the rate of penalty was reduced to 22%. The said orders were challenged before the writ court.

(3.) THE learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that there was no mens rea and as such the statutory authority was not correct in directing the appellant to pay penalty. According to the learned counsel, there was a finding recorded by the statutory authority regarding mens rea. However, the said finding was ignored while directing the appellant to pay damages under Section 14B of the Provident Fund Act.