DEVARSHOLA TEA ESTATE Vs. ASSTT. PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner Company is going through severe financial crisis and they are unable to pay the entire demand of the respondent Organization towards interest under Section 7Q of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. In view of the financial difficulty faced by the Company, the petitioner is willing to pay the demand in 24 equated monthly installments, as given in the memo dated 05.07.2019, which is filed before this Court. The memo reads as under:

(2.) At this, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent organization would file a memo providing for certain conditions to be complied with by the petitioner. The memo filed on behalf of the respondent reads as under:

(3.) According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the contribution has already been made, but only in respect of the interest portion alone, which is the subject matter of the writ petition, the petitioner seeks to pay in equated monthly installments, as stated in the memo, which is extracted above.