Hexaware Technology Ltd v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-I

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 12377 OF 2024 Hexaware Technology Ltd ... Petitioner

Versus

Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-I ... Respondent Ms. Samiksha Kanani a/w Ms. Prasanna Pawar for the Petitioners. Mr. Gunjan Chaubey a/w Chaitanya Shirasao for Respondent. (RPFC-1)

CORAM

: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.

DATE : 5 SEPTEMBER 2024.

P.C. :

1) One of the grievance raised in the present Petition is the direction issued by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner in operative portion of the Order by which the establishment is directed to pay the respective amounts within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the Order.

2) Ms. Kanani, the learned counsel appearing for Petitioner would rely upon provisions of Rule 7(2) of the Tribunal (Procedure) 1 of MANE SONALI DILIP MANE SONALI DILIP Date: 2024.09.05 18:51:27 +0530

Rules 1997 to submit that the establishment has right to prefer Appeal against Order passed under Section 7A of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 within 60 days. She would also invite my attention to the order passed by this Court in Kulgaon Badlapur Nagar Parishad Vs. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner II, Compliance III, Regional Office, Thane Writ Petition No. 4973 of 2021 decided on 22 February 2022. In paragraph 9 (c) thereof, this Court has issued the following directions: "(c) The Respondent authorities are hereby directed that henceforth in all matters u/s. 7A Assessment, steps u/s. 8F shall not be initiated until the Appeal period as prescribed u/s7-I is exhausted."

It appears that the Order passed by this Court in Kulgaon Badlapur Nagar Parishad (supra) has been circulated by the Additional Central PF Commissioner (HQ) (Compliance, Legal and Recovery) to all Additional CPFC (Zones) and all RPFCs - In Charge of Regions for information and for necessary action. Despite clear directions by this Court, the concerned official has directed the establishment to pay the assessed amounts within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the Order. Mr. Chaubey, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent submits that though period of 15 days is mentioned in the order, the same shall not be enforced before expiry of appeal period of 60 days. However, it is unfathomable as to why the concerned officer has specified period of 15 days in the Order if the same is not to be executed before expiry of 60 days.

Prima facie, it appears that the order is in breach of directions issued by this Court in Kulgaon Badlapur Nagar Parishad (supra). This Court was inclined to summon the concerned officer for initiation of appropriate proceedings.

Mr. Chaubey would submit that necessary corrigendum to the Order would be issued forthwith. To ensure compliance, list the Petition High on Board on 9 September 2024.

[SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.] 3 of