VIJAY AGGARWAL Vs. RECOVERY OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The two writ petitions address the same issue namely, of the tenability of the orders of recoveries issued against the Managing Directors of the Companies for failure to make the contributions to the Provident Fund by the Company. The impugned notices were on the basis that there were arrears assessed against the Company and they have not been paid and hence the authorized officer had forwarded the claim to be recovered by the Recovery Officer through a certificate issued under Section 8-C of the Employees' Provident Fund and Misc. provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The impugned notice also states that the recovery of arrears and interest payable under Section 7-Q of the Act, having not been paid it was proposed to execute the certificate by arrest and imprisonment of the persons. It is seen that in both the writ petitions the impugned notices had been issued to Sh. Vijay Aggarwal describing him as Director of M/s Usha Autocast Limited. The notice also recites that in the event of failure of deposit of arrears as demanded further interest at the rate of 12% per annum will be calculated and recoveries besides taking all other penal actions under Section 8-B to 8-C of the Act.

(2.) The learned counsel Mr. Mutneja appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Mahajan appearing on behalf of Mr. J.C. Verma state that admittedly the liability to contribute to the fund under the Act was only against the employer which under Section 2 (e) of the Act meant either the owner or occupier or the other persons detailed under the Section. The definition under Section 2 (e) of the Provident Fund Act states as follows :-

(3.) The issuance of the recovery certificate contemplated under Section 8-B of the P.F. Act reads as follows :-