Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner v. Iyer, Kerala High Court, Judgment, Law, casemine.com

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Case Number

W.P(C). No. 31292 of 2009

Attorney(S)

By Advs. Sri. N.N Sugunapalan (Sr.), Smt. T.N Girija, SC, Epf Organisation
R1 by Adv. Sri. H.B Shenoy
R1 by Adv. Sri. B. Ashok Shenoy
R1 by Adv. Smt. Lakshmi B. Shenoy
R2 by Adv. Sri. James Mathew Kadavan

Judges

Anu Sivaraman, J.

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Please sign up to generate summary.

To access the original judgment, please Sign In or Subscribe.

Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner v. Iyer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2016/25TH PHALGUNA, 1937 WP(C).No. 31292 of 2009 (F)

----------------------------

PETITIONER(S):

--------------------------

THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER

EMPLOYEE'S PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION

REGIONAL OFFICE,BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, PATTOM,

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

BY ADVS.SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.)

SMT.T.N.GIRIJA, SC,EPF ORGANISATION

RESPONDENT(S):

----------------------------

1. M/S.IYER & MAHESH REP.BY ITS PROPRIETOR N. MAHESH, S/O. NARAYANAN NARAYANA TOWERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -14.

2. G. RAJENDRAN, GOVINDABHAVANAM, VATTAVILA

THIRUMALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

3. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 7TH FLOOR, 60, SKYLARK

BUILDING, NEHRU PLACE NEW DELHI-19.

R1 BY ADV. SRI.H.B.SHENOY

R1 BY ADV. SRI.B.ASHOK SHENOY

R1 BY ADV. SMT.LAKSHMI B.SHENOY

R2 BY ADV. SRI.JAMES MATHEW KADAVAN

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15-03-2016,

THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 31292 of 2009 (F)

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXT.P1: COPY OF THE COVERAGE NOTICE DATED 29.06.2007 ISSUED TO THE

1ST RESPONDENT.

EXT.P2: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21.08.07 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER.

EXT.P3: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 04.12.2007 ISSUED BY THE REGIONAL

PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT

EMPLOYER.

EXT.P4: COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 13.12.07 ISSUED BY THE 1ST

RESPONDENT COMPANY.

EXT.P5: COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 03.03.08 GIVEN BY THE 1ST

RESPONDENT COMPANY.

EXT.P6: COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

COMPANY.

EXT.P7: COPY OF THE SALARY STATEMENT FOR THE PERIOD 3/1998 TO 2/1999

PRODUCD BEFORE THE PETITIONER.

EXT.P8: COPY OF THE LEDGER ACCOUNT REGISTER FOR THE PERIOD 3/1998

PRODUCED BEFORE THE PETITIONER.

EXT.P9: COPY OF THE LIST OF 32 EMPLOYEES WITH DATE OF JOINING DUTY

ATTESTED BY THE MANAGER(ACCOUNTS).

EXT.P10: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10.08.07 ISSUED BY THE 1ST

RESPONDENT.

EXT.P11: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17.12.08 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO

THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXT.P12: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 12.01.2009 IN W.P.C NO. 1101 OF 1999

OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.

ET.P13: COPY OF THE APPEAL NO. ATA NO. 66(7)/09 FILED BY THE 1ST

RESPONDENT.

EXT.P14: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.09.09 IN ATA NO. 66(7)/09 OF THE

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL.

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A TO JUDGE

LSN

ANU SIVARAMAN, J.

--------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). No. 31292 of 2009

----------------------------------------------

Dated this the 15^thday of March, 2016

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner of the EPF organisation with the following prayers:

a. to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to call for the records leading to Ext.P14 order and quash the same. b. to grant the cost of these proceedings to the petitioner and

c. to grant such other and further reliefs as are just, proper and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the issue raised in this writ petition is covered by the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in

Administrator, Cosmopolitan Hospitals (P) Ltd., Tvm v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Tvm and Another [2015(5) KHC 16]. The Division Bench has found that the original petition preferred by the first respondent was not maintainable. But that will not be a bar for the organisation in challenging the order impugned, if such

W.P.(C). No. 31292 of 2009

course is otherwise sustainable in accordance with the relevant provisions of law.

This writ petition is also accordingly disposed of in the above terms.

Sd/-ANU SIVARAMAN,

Judge

lsn

Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner v. Iyer

Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner v. Iyer

Comments