The Hon'ble The Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma
and
The Hon'ble Sri Justice A. Rajasheker Reddy
Writ Appeal No.539 of 2008
Judgment: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)
The present appeal is arising out of Order
dated 13.03.2008, passed by the learned Single Judge in
W.P.No.14725 of 2005.
2. The facts of the case reveal that as against the order passed
by respondent No.2, under Section 7-A of the Employees'
Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short 'the Act of 1952'), on 04.09.2000, an appeal was preferred before the Tribunal. The appeal was certainly barred by limitation and therefore, an application was filed for condoning the delay.
The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the appeal was preferred on 23.07.2001. The Tribunal has dismissed the application for condonation of delay of 246 days vide order dated 20.04.2005. Against the said order of the Tribunal, writ petition was preferred and the same has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge, taking into account the judgment delivered by a Division Bench of this Court in case of Assistant Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Meerut vs. Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal and others1. 1 2006-II-LLJ 338 2 The statutory provisions governing the field as contained under Rule 7 of the Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1997, are reproduced as under:
"Fee, time for filing appeal, deposit of amount due on filing appeal-
(1) Every appeal filed with the Registry shall be accompanied by a fee of two thousand rupees to be remitted in the form of crossed demand draft on a nationalised bank in favour of the Registrar of the Tribulal and payable at the main branch of that Bank at the station where the seat of the said Tribunal is situated ] (2) Any person aggrieved by a notification issued by the Central Government or an Order passed by the Central Government or any other authority under the Act, may within 60 days from the date of issue of the notification/order, prefer an appeal to the Tribunal.
Provided that the Tribunal may if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the appeal within the prescribed period, extend the said period by a further period of 60 days.
Provided further that no appeal by the employer shall be entertained by a Tribunal unless he has deposited with the Tribunal [a Demand Draft Payable in the Fund and bearing] 75 per cent of the amount due from him as determined under Section 7-A;
Provided also that the Tribunal may for reasons to be recorded in writing, waive or reduce the amount to be deposited under Section 7-O."
3
The aforesaid statutory provision of law makes it very clear that an appeal has to be preferred within 60 days from the date of the order passed under Section 7-A of the Act of 1952 and the Tribunal enjoys power to condone the delay up to a period of 60 days after the prescribed period. After 120 days, the Tribunal does not have a jurisdiction to entertain the appeal or to condone delay.
In these circumstances, in the considered opinion of this Court, Tribunal was justified in dismissing of appeal and the learned Single Judge was also justified in dismissing the Writ Petition. In the considered opinion of this Court, as the Act of 1952 does not provide for condonation of delay beyond 120 days, this Court also cannot rewrite the Statute by condoning the delay.
Writ appeal is dismissed accordingly. Consequently, Interlocutory Applications, pending if any, stand dismissed.
_______________________ Satish Chandra Sharma, CJ ____________________ A. Rajasheker Reddy, J 08.11.2021 lur