M/S Indian Oil Corporation Ltd v. Asst. Provident Fund Commissioner
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JANUARY 2015/25TH POUSHA, 1936 WP(C).No. 8598 of 2012 (Y) --------------------------- PETITIONER :
----------------------- M/S INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED., COCHIN DIVISIONAL OFFICE, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI-682 035, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER (RETAIL SALES) MR.R.RADHAKRISHNAN.
BY ADVS.SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, 36/685 A, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, P.B.NO.1895, KALOOR, KOCHI-682 017
2. EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SCOPE MINAR, CORE II, 4TH FLOOR, LAXMI NAGAR DISTRICT CENTRE, LAXMI NAGAR, NEW DELHI-110 092
3. M/S.MAMBRA FUELS(IBP AUTO SERVICE), EDAMUTTOM, THRISSUR-680 568
4. M/S. STATE BANK OF INDIA, OVERSEES BRANCH, WILLINGDON ISLAND, COCHIN-682 003 R1 BY DR.S.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR,SENIOR ADVOCATE ADV. SRI.A.RAJASIMHAN,SC,EPF ORGANISATION R3 BY ADV.SRI.MANU S. GOVIND R4 BY ADV. SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15-01-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
WP(C).NO.8598/2012 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXT.P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE DEALERSHIP AGREEMENT DTD 2/6/2009 BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND 3RD RESPONDENT EXT.P2:- TRUE COPY OF THE SUMMONS TO WITNESS DTD 30/9/2011 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT EXT.P3:- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD 8/10/2010 BY THE PETITIONER TO THE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, EMPLYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, THRISSUR EXT.P4:- TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT DTD 7/12/2011 EXT.P5:- TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD 30/9/2011 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P6:- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD 14/2/2012 PASSED BY THE IST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P7:- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD 27/3/2012 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :
NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO.JUDGE sts
K. Vinod Chandran, J.
==================================== W.P.(C)No.8598 of 2012 ==================================== Dated this the 15th day of January, 2015.
JUDGMENT
1. Petitioner is aggrieved with Ext.P6 order, which has been passed under Section 7A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The specific issue dealt with was the coverage of the employees under the third respondent, a separate dealership of the petitioner. The dealer was proceeded against and in the course of enquiry, it was found that, the company, which was the Principal, was responsible for the workmen and hence, the Company was also mulcted with the liability to pay the amounts, computed under Section 7A, by Ext.P6 order. The petitioner Company chose to file the above writ petition, contending that, such liability, mulcted on the petitioner, is totally without jurisdiction.
2. In any event, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner
W.P.(C)No.8598 of 2012 -:2:- that, the dealer, one Soumya Balakrishnan, who was at the relevant time carrying on the dealership of the third respondent, had filed an appeal before the Employees' Provident Funds Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi against Ext.P6. The appeal, numbered as ATA 335(7)/12, has been allowed by the Tribunal on 2.4.2013. The writ petition, alternatively filed by the said Soumya Balakrishnan, numbered as W.P.(C)No.28870/2011, also is said to have been closed, on the appeal, having been allowed. Ext.P6 passed against the third respondent, hence, does not survive. If the order under Section 7A does not survive, then there is no question of any liability cast on the petitioner.
Writ petition is allowed, setting aside the recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner.
Sd/- K. Vinod Chandran, Judge.
sl.
/true copy/