NAND KISHORE LAXMINARAYAN AGARWAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a writ petition which challenges the order of attachment passed by the Assistant Commissioner and Recovery Officer, Employees Provident Fund Organization, Maharashtra and Goa. By its order dated 14.08.1996, it attached the property of respondent No. 4 that was purchased by present petitioner in the auction sale held by respondent No. 3 Bank on 23.07.1996. The petitioner paid amount of Rs. 31,35,000/-. As per the attachment order the attachment was for a sum of Rs. 3,63,230/-. Said amount is said to be deposited under protest on 20.08.1996. According to the petitioner, issuance of recovery certificate and attachment by the order dated 14.08.1996 is illegal and needs to be quashed and set aside.

(2.) Heard learned advocate Shri Marlapalle for the petitioner. He has argued that, what were purchased were dead assets. The factory was closed long back and therefore it is not an establishment and Section 17B of the Employees of the Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, (for short "E.P.F. Act"), is not applicable. Section 17B of the E.P.F. Act is as follows:

(3.) The words used is not 'employer' so far as transferee is concerned, but the word 'person' is used with reference to transferee. The transfer can be of whole of the establishment or part and the liability of transferor and transferee of establishment is said to be joint and several. Admittedly, amount of Rs. 3,63,230/- was due towards contribution of employees of respondent No. 4.