HANUMAN VYAYAM Vs. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONERII

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the order dated 29.11.2005 passed by the respondent no.1, thereby imposing damages under provisions of Section 14B and also levying interest under provisions of Section 7Q of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, (for short the said Act).

(2.) THE facts relevant for considering the challenge as raised in the writ petition is that the petitioner no.2 is duly covered under provisions of said Act and it was liable to pay provident fund contribution in terms of said Act. For the period from June 1992 till February 2001 there was a failure on the part of the petitioners to pay the provident fund contribution within the stipulated time. Hence. on 28.06.2005 a show cause notice came to be issued by the respondent no.1 calling upon the petitioner no.2 to appear before the said authority and to show cause as to why the damages should not be imposed. The petitioners filed their reply pointing out that the show cause as issued was vague and necessary details had not been furnished. Subsequently, certain information was forwarded by the respondent no.1 to the petitioners. On 17.11.2005 further submissions were filed on behalf of the petitioners. Thereafter on hearing the representative of the petitioners, the respondent no. 1 passed an order holding the petitioners liable to pay damages under provisions of Section 14B of the said Act to the tune of Rs. 4,87,811/. Similarly a direction to pay interest under provisions of Section 7Q was also issued for a sum of Rs. 59,676/. This order dated 29.11.2005 is under challenge in the present writ petition.

(3.) SHRI K. H. Deshpande, learned Senior Counsel with Shri A. J. Deshpande, learned counsel for the petitioners made the following submissions: