M/S. Vbc Ferro Alloys Ltd. v. Union Of India

[ 3418 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY ,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO WRIT APPEAL NO: 1439 OF 2024 Writ Appeal under clause '1 5 of the Letters Patent Appeal Preferred Against Order Dated 1211212024 in WP.No. 34950 of 2024. on the file of the High Court. Between:

M/s. VBC Ferro Alloys Ltd., A company registered'under the Companies Act, Having its Registered Office at 6-2-9131914, 3rd Floor,Progressive Towerb,Khairatabad, Hyderabad, Telangana, Factory at Rudraram Village, Patancheru Mandal, Medak District, Rep. by its Authorised Signatory P. Venkateswar Rao, S/o. Late Parusuramaiah aged about 62 years, Occ. Director ...AppELLANT/pETrrroNER AND Union of lndia, Ministry of Labour and Employment, Employees Provident Fund Organization, Baiiishva Nidhi Bhavan, New Delhi, rep by its Additional Central Provident Fund Commissioner.

Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and Authority, U/S 7A of EPF and [/PAct. The Employees Provident Organization, Regional Office, Patancheru, 1 2-1 ,Susheeram Complex, Patancheru, Sangareddy District-5O2319, rep by its Recovery officer'

...RES'.NDENTS/RES'.NDENTS lA NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the Notice to show cause as to why a warrant of arrest should not be issued vide Office Letter No. TS/RO/PTC/171g2lRecyCPt2st 20241589, dated 22t11t2024 issued by the 2nd respondent, pending disposal of the Writ appeal Counsel for the Appellant: SRl. RAJA SHEKAR RAO SALVAJI Counsel forthe Respondent No.1: SRt GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR Dy. SOLICITOR GEN. OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI G. VENKATESHWARLU, SC FOR EPFO The Court made the following: JUDGMENT

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AI.OK ARADHE AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENryAS RAO WRIT APPEAL No. 1439 of 2024 JUDGMENT: (t'er ttle Hoi'bLe the Chpl Justice Atok Ara(1he) Mr. Raja Shekar Rao Salvaji, learned counsel for the appellant Mr. G.Venkateshvarlu, learned Standing Counsel for the Emplovees Provident Fund Orgalisation, [or the respondents 2.

Heard on the question of admission 3.

This intra court appeal is directed against the ord.er dated 12.12.2024 passed by the learned Single Jr.rdge by r.r,hich the u rit petition preferred by the appellant, namely W.P.No.349[)O of 2024, has been dismissed.

4.

Facts lliving rise to filing of this appeal brieflr. stated are that th: appellant, namely M/s. VBC Ferro Alloys Limited, r,r,hich is a registered company under the provisions cf the Companies Act, 1S represented by its

\ whole time director. The company had not paid the provident fund dues to its workers. Thereupon, an industrial dispute was raised and the Regional provident Fund Commissioner passed an order dated 08.05.2015 directing payment of provident fund to the employees for the period from April, 2Ol2 to December, 20 13. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, by taking into account the settlement between the parties passed al order of assessment for an amount of Rs. 1 ,21 ,84 ,232 I -. 5.

According to the appellalt, a sum of Rs.1,13,94,988/- was paid on account of dues payable to I the employees on account of provident fund. However, a l I I sum of Rs.7,67,7831- was not paid. The Regional l Provident Fund Commissioner thereupon issued al order dated 06.1 1.2015 under Section 14B and under Section 7Q of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous i I Provisions Act, 1952, for payment of an amount of I I Rs.93,48,695/-.

II II I 6.

Since the amount mentioned in the order dated

06. 1 I .20 1 5 was not paid, thereupon a notice dated i i i :

'

) 16.02.2016 was issued for conducting auction of the property beionging to the appeliant for recovery of :L sum of Rs.1,16,50,519/- towards provident fund dues and date of auction rvas; {ixed on 2l .O3.2016. The appellant th ereupon filed a writ petition, namely W.P.No.9443 of 2016, which is pending belbre the learned Single Judge. In the aforesaid writ petition an interim order was granted by which the Recovery Olficer was directed to decide the representation submitted bv the appellant dated 22 .O2. 20 16 rvithin a period of tr.r,o u,eeks 7.

It is the case of the appellant that the representation submitted bfr him was rejected on 31.03.2O16 without affording arr opportunity of hearing to him. The appellant learnt abo rt the decision of the represental.ion on 06.07 .2023. The Recovery Officer issued another letter dated 03 C7 .2023 asking the appellant to ascertain whether ary stay has been granted in favour of the appellant. Thereafter, the Regional Provideni Fund Commissior.er issued a notice dated 22.1),.2024 to the appellant, inter alia, on the ground that the appellant has failed to pal. the sum due on account of provident fund to ,/

the employees of the appellant. The appellant was, therefore, asked to appear before the Regional provident Fund Commissioner on 16.12.2024 and was required to show cause as to why he should not be committed to civil pnson.

8.

The appellant instead of submitted any reply or explanation, challenged the aforesaid show cause notice in a writ petition. The learned Single Judge, by an order dated 12.72.2024 has dismissed the writ petition. Hence, this appeal 9 .

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has realised his mistake and ought to have responded to the show cause notice which was issued to him. It is submitted that in case the appellant is gralted two weeks time to respond to the show cause notice dated 22.11.2024, the appellant shall appear before the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and shalt file the reply.

10. In view of the aforesaid submission and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the order dated 12. 12.2024

passed b1' the iearned Single Judge in W.P'No'34950 of 2024 is morillied.

11. The appellant is granted the liberty to file a reply to the notice <lated, 22.11.2024 on or before 06.O1.2025. It is further directed that the appellant shall appear br:fore the Regional Pr,rvident Fund Commissioner on O6.01.2025 along u.ith the reply. The Regional Provident Fund Commissio'rer, after considering the reply submittt:d by the appellant, .s granted the liberty to proceed further in the matter in accordance with law.

12. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shal1 stand closed. Hor.r,ever, there shal1 be no order as r-o costs. SD/- I. NAGA LAKSHMI DEPUrYlREGtfInan \ //TRUE COPY// j To, sEcfioN oFFtcER I The Additional centrar provident Fund commissioner, Union of rndia, Ministrv of Labour and Emorovment, EmproveeJ Fiouiolht ruil iitdn#iil1 Baiiishva Nidh Bhavah, New Delhi, lfr^e !.ecgv-eg- officer' Region.ar provident Fund commissioner and Authoritv. Htl,ll$**,fr 3,1y?4?:.I:f; "="H#'4""'":##;#,?I9fl :,i,:'"*[:%%11 District-50231 (t Th-e-A_uthoriserl Signatory, p. V^enkateswar Rao,M/s. VBC Ferro Alloys Ltd., A golnpglry registered under the Companies Act, Having its negiit"r€,;iOfrili'ai 6-2-9131914, 3rd Ftoor,progreslire _Towei;khiirataua"ol'- itvo-,,iiii"i, Telangana, Fa:tory at Rudrarair Village, palanchlri, frrfrnOaf, IMed;k Diiirict: S/o. l_a_te Parusuramaiah aged aboutb?v"rr., OC.. bir".tor. 9nu 99 to sRr. RAJA sHEKAR.nng_$a-LVajriIJu6""t" Iopucl 9^ry .C^g to SRt. GAD| PRAVEEN KUMAR, oy.',sollcrroH ce r.i. op rruorn toPUCl One CC to SRI. G. VENKATESHWARLU, SC FOR EPFO tOpUCl Two CD Copier;

\ !

C) w BIu BIVI

HIGH COURT DATED:31 11212024 F.1 gOF rq dD v7 ,:'

I e o l{ F&) 3\ $

JUDGMENT

WA.No.1439 of 2024 c/H I o DISPOSING OF THE WRIT APPEAL WITHOUT COSTS @ .& )9