REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER Vs. DECCAN ENTERPRISES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order dated 15.10.2010 passed by the second respondent in Ref.No.ATA No.558 (13) 2005, is under challenge in the present writ petition.

(2.) The writ petitioner is the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner. The order of the Appellate Tribunal is challenged by the writ petitioner on the ground that the Tribunal, while remanding the matter back to the Employees Provident Fund Authority with a direction to assess the dues @ 17% inclusive of interest. The writ petitioner was directed to assess the dues at 17% inclusive of interest. Such a direction issued would affect the provisions of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 and further the powers of the authorities to decide the issues on merits will also get affected.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent made a submission that the first respondent-Company is suffering from financial loss and the financial loss established before the Tribunal, which was considered by the Tribunal and an order was passed. There is no infirmity under Section 7-L of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The Tribunal is empowered to remand the matter and therefore, thee is no infirmity as such.