JODHPUR SAHAKARI UPBHOKTA Vs. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner M/s. Jodhpur Sahakari Upbhokta Wholesals Bhanndar Ltd, Jodhpur (hereinafter referred to as the Sahakari Bhandar ) has challenged the order ( Ex. 7 ) dated 17th September 1981 passed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Rajasthan, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commissioner's) and the order (Ex. 12) dated 3rd April, 1982 passed by the Accounts Offficer in the office of the Commissioner By order dated 17th September, 1981, a sum of Rs 15,703/ - has been imposed as damages on the Sahakari Bhandar under Section 14B of the Employees Provident Fund and Misc. Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on account of delayed payment of the provident fund contributions, family pension contributions and administrative charges. By order dated 3rd April, 1982, the request made by the counsel for the Sahakari Bhandar for setting aside the the order dated 17th September, 1981 was rejected.

(2.) THE Sahakari Bhandar is a co -operative society registered under the provisions of the Rajasthan Co -operative Societies Act, 1953. It is running a Super Market or Sahakari Bhandar at Jodhpur. It is covered by the provisions of the Act. By a notice dated 4th March, 1980 issued by the Commissioner under Section 14B of the Act, the Sahakari Bhandar was informed that the Sahakari Bhandar had not paid the employee's share as well as the employer's share of Family Pension Fund contribution, the administrative charges, the contribution of the Employee's Deposit Linked Insurance Scheme as well as the Administrative charges to the Employee's Deposit Linked Insurance Scheme for the period August, 1972 to February, 1977 and the arrears for the period May, 1973 to November, 1977 within 15 . days from the close of each of the aforesaid months. By the notice aforesaid, the Commissioner also informed the Sahakari Bhandar that the Commissioner had to levy damages on all belated payments of contribution and administrative charges under Section 14B of the Act and that for determining the amount of damages leviable upon the Sahakari Bhandar, he desired to give to the Sahakari Bhandar an opportunity to represent its case. The Commissioner, therefore, summoned the Sahakari Bhandar to appear before him, either in person or through an authorised representative, on 16th April, 1980 along with all relevant records/documents for confirmation or other -wise of actual dates of payments made by the Sahakari Bhandar for the various months as shown in the statement enclosed to the said notice. It appears that no body appeared on behalf of the Sahakari Bhandar before the Commissioner on 16th April, 1980, in response to the said notice. Another notice dated 24th April, 1980 was given by the Commissioner to the Sahakari Bhandar whereby the Sahakari Bhandar was requested to appear before him on 4th June, 1980. On 4th June, 1980, one telegram was sent by the General Manager of the Sahakari Bhandar seeking adjournment of the case for 10th or 1 th June, 1950 on the ground that the legal adviser of the Sahakari Bhandar was ill. On 10th June, 1980, the legal adviser attended the office of the Commissioner and he was informed that the case was fixed for hearing on 6th July 1980. On 16th July, 1980 no body appeared on behalf of the Sahakari Bhandar and the case was adjourned to 10th September, 1980. The case was further adjourned from time to time but neither any reply was filed nor anybody appeared on behalf of the Sahakari Bhandar The matter was taken up by the Commissioner on 17ch June, 1981 but on that date also no body appeared on behalf of the Sahakari Bhandar. The matter was taken up by the Commissioner on 17th June, 1981 but on that date also, no body appeared on behalf of the Sahakari Bhandar and there upon the Commissioner decided to proceed exparte. Thereafter the Commissioner passed the order dated 17th September,1981 wherein, while observing the although the total amount in respect of which the default had been committed was Rs. 15,997.63, he impose, damages to the extent of Rs. 15,703/ -. After passing the aforesaid order, the counsel for the Sahakari Bhandar, on 9th November 1981, submitted an application for setting aside the order dated 17th September, 1981. By letter dated 3rd April, 1982, the Accounts Officer in the office of the Commissioner informed the Sahakari Bhandar that the request contained in the letter dated 9th November, 1981 for setting aside the order dated 17th September 1981 could not be accepted to. Thereupon, the Sahakari Bhandar has filed this writ petition.

(3.) I have heard Shri B.C. Mehta, the learned counsel for the Sahakari Bhandar and Shri R.R. Vyas, the learned counsel for the respondents. Both the learned counsel requested that the writ petition may be finally disposed of at this stage and arguments were heard on that basis.