Allahabad High Court
M/S Sahara India Commercial Co. ... vs Union Of India Thru. Secy. Labour ... on 9 June, 2021
Bench: Ritu Raj Awasthi, Dinesh Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 1
Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 11146 of 2021
Petitioner :- M/S Sahara India Commercial Co. Ltd.Thru.Auth.Officer
Respondent :- Union Of India Thru. Secy. Labour Min. Of Labour N.Delhi&Anr
Counsel for Petitioner :- Avinash Chandra,Akhilesh Kumar Kalra,Piyush Kumar Agarwal,Rahul Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.,Akhilesh Pratap Singh
Hon'ble Ritu Raj Awasthi,J.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
1. This case has been taken up through Video Conferencing.
2. Heard Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Kalra, appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Ambrish Rai, appearing for respondent no. 1 and Mr. Akhilesh Pratap Singh appearing for respondent no. 2.
3. Learned counsel for respondent no. 2 submits that he has filed application for dismissal of the writ petition along with short counter affidavit.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the pleadings made in the short counter affidavit have already been considered in the judgment and order dated 21.05.2021 passed in Writ Petition No. 10644 (M/B) of 2021.
The short counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no. 2 is taken on record.
5. This writ petition has been filed, seeking following reliefs:-
(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the notice dated 20.03.2021 under Section 7Q of the Act of 1952, annexed as Annexure No.1.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the notice dated 20.03.2021 under Section 14 B of the Act of 1952, annexed as Annexure No.4.
(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders dated 13.05.2021 passed under Section 7Q of the Act of 1952, annexed as Annexure No. 5.
(iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders dated 13.05.2021 passed under Section 14B of the Act of 1952, annexed as Annexure No. 6
(v) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 not to take any coercive steps pursuance to the orders dated 13.05.2021 passed under Section 7Q and 14B of the Act of 1952.
(vi) Issue ad-interim mandamus to the aforesaid effect.
(vii) Cost(s) of the writ petition be awarded in favour of the petitioners
(viii) Any other order, which the Hon'ble Court may deem just, it and proper in the circumstances of the case."
6. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 submits that the controversy involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment and order dated 21.05.2021 passed in Writ Petition No. 10644 (M/B) of 2021, whereby this Court has disposed of the matter with the observation that the matter shall stand remanded back to the authority concerned. The petitioner shall appear in the office of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Lucknow for inspection of records, adhering to the Covid-19 Protocol in the office of respondent no.2 thereupon the official shall allow the inspection of records and thereafter proceed with the matter and pass a fresh order. The operative portion of the judgment and order dated 21.05.2021 passed in Writ Petition No.10644 (M/B) of 2021 is reproduced below:-
"Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case as the notice referred above was issued on 20.03.2021 and it was received a day or two thereafter by the petitioner as also the fact that inspite of having put in appearance on 01.04.2021, the petitioner's Officials could not inspect the records of the Commissioner's Office on account of COVID-19 pandemic and could not appear due to lock down, we are of the opinion that final order has been passed without the petitioner being heard in the circumstances narrated hereinabove. The least that is required in the matter is that the petitioner should have an opportunity to file its objections in terms of the show-cause notice, which contains the computation sheet of dues and also asks the petitioner to file its objections to the same we therefore, set-aside the final order dated 13.05.2021 only on this ground without touching the merits of the controversy and grant two weeks' time to the petitioner to file its objections personally or Online as feasible before the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Lucknow, who shall provide E-mail address for Online filing of objections, if required, if it is already not available with the petitioner, to facilitate this exercise. After submission of reply, if the petitioner wants a personal hearing, as has been offered in the show-cause notice dated 20.03.2021, then the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Lucknow may either give him opportunity of personal hearing through video conferencing or if the petitioner is able to appear in person likewise as per the convenience of the parties. After this exercise, the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Lucknow shall pass his final order at the earliest preferably within ten days of receipt of objections, as submitted by counsel for the opposite parties Sri Akhilesh Pratap Singh.
Regarding inspection of records for the purposes of filing of objections within the aforesaid period it is provided that the petitioner's Officials, duly authorized, may present themselves in the Office of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Lucknow, for inspection of the records adhering to the COVID-19 protocol on any working day in the next week, thereupon the Officials shall allow the inspection of records.
The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms"
7. The learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 admits that the aforesaid judgment and order has been passed in similar facts, involving identical controversy. The only difference is in the name of the petitioner and the amount claimed by the respondents.
8. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, challenging the impugned order dated 13.05.2021 whereby payment of interest, amounting to Rs.9,46,26,052/-, and payment of E.P.F., amounting to Rs.8,99,05,800/- have been claimed by respondent no. 2 from the petitioner.
9. In view of above, we do not deem it necessary to decide the case as fresh on merit since it is admitted between the parties that the controversy involved and the legal issues raised in this writ petition are one and the same and are squarely covered by the judgment and order dated 21.05.2021 passed in Writ Petition No.10644 (M/B) of 2021.
10. This writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of in terms of the judgment and order dated 21.05.2021 passed in Writ Petition No.10644 (M/B) of 2021.
While issuing the certified copy of this order, the office shall also provide the copy of the judgment and order dated 21.05.2021 passed in Writ Petition No.10644 of 2021.
Order Date :- 9.6.2021
MVS/-
