Bombay High Court
Bhartiya Vaidyak Samanvaya ... vs State Of Maharashtra Thr.Secty. & ... on 1 August, 2017
Bench: Ravi K. Deshpande
wp.2223.03
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 2223/2003
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION 895/2017
* Bhartiya Vaidyak Samanvaya Samiti
Through its General Secretary
Shri Shivcharan Sharma Chhangani
Shri Ayurved Mahavidyalaya,
Dhanwantri Marg, Hauman Nagar
Nagpur. ..PETITIONER.
VERSUS
1) State of Maharashtra
Through Secretary
Department of Medical Education
& Drugs, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32
2) Director of Ayurved
Government of Maharashtra
Khanna Construction Building
Khadni Marg, Worli
Mumbai.
3) Assistant Director of Ayurved
Vidarbha and Marathwada Region
New Administrative Building
Civil Lines, Nagpur.
4) All India Ayurvdic Teachers' Association
Through Local Unit Secretary
Dr. Pradeep Baldeoprasad Tiwari
Shri Ayurved Mahavidyalaya,
Hanuman nagar, Nagpur.
::: Uploaded on - 02/08/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 06/08/2017 00:28:50 :::
wp.2223.03
2
5) Regional Provident Fund Commissioner
Bhavishya Nidhi Bhavan
132- A Ridge Road, Raghuji Nagar
Nagpur -440 009.
6) Nagpur University
Through its Registrar
Maharajbhagh Road
Nagpur.
7) Maharashtra University of Health
Sciences: Through its Registrar
Gangapur Road, Nasik.
8) Shikshan Shulka Samiti for
Higher Technical Educational Institutions
Through Secretary
Miss I.A. Kundan (IAS)
Room No.305, Third floor
Government Polytechnic Building
49, Kherwadi Ali Yawarjag Marg
Bandra (East)
Mumbai 400 051.
9) The Education Officer (Secondary)
Zilla Parishad, Nagpur.
10) The Director of Education (Higher Education)
Directorate of Education, Pune.
11) The Secretary
Higher and Technical Education
Deptt. Government of Maharashtra
Mantralaya, Mumbai 400 032. ..RESPONDENTS
.
...................................................................................................................
Mr. H.V. Thakur, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr. S.M.Ukey, Additional Government Pleader for respondent
Nos.1 to 3
::: Uploaded on - 02/08/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 06/08/2017 00:28:50 :::
wp.2223.03
3
Mr. A.R.Patil, Adv.for respondent no.4
Mr. R.S. Sundaram, Adv. for respondents 5 and 6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : R.K. DESHPANDE &
MRS.SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.
DATED : 1 st
August, 2017
ORAL JUDGMENT: (Per R.K.DESHPANDE, J.)
Two questions are involved in the present petition: (i)
whether the petitioner-institution is entitled to increase in the grants
payable by the State Government in respect of contribution of the
employer to the extent of 10% towards employees provident fund from
1.5.1997 and 12% from 22.9.1997, and (ii) whether the respondents
are entitled to recover the excess grant paid to the institution which is
assessed at Rs.43,43,387/-?
2. We have seen the Government Resolution dated 21.1.1970
by which the Government has directed that the item mentioned therein
should be added to the list of approved expenditure appended to the
Government Resolution dated 16th May, 1950. The item shown therein
is as under :
"Contribution towards employees provident fund subject to the limit
wp.2223.03
of 8½ % of the emoluments of the employees"
The petitioner is receiving contribution towards employees
provident fund at the rate of 8½ % of the emoluments of the employees
since 21.01.1970. There is no dispute about it. This 8½ % contribution
of the employer prescribed under Section 6 of the Employees Provident
Funds & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 was increased to 10% with
effect from 1.5.1997 and, to 12% from 22.9.1997. It is therefore urged
that in continuation of the Government Resolution dated 21.1.1970, the
respondent-State Government is under obligation to shoulder the
responsibility of entire 12% share payable by the employer as a
contribution towards employees provident fund.
3. We do not find that any such statutory right exists in
favour of the petitioner-Institution to claim enhancement in the
contribution from 8½% to either at 10% or 12% as enhanced from
1.5.1997 and 22.9.1997 respectively. The Government has undertaken to
pay the share @ 8½% contribution as per the Government Resolution
dated 21.1.1970, which is an assurance and we cannot compel the
Government by issuing direction to enhance it or share the additional
wp.2223.03
financial burden, as claimed by the petitioner.
4. So far as the aspect of recovery of an amount of Rs.
43,43,387/- from the petitioner of towards excess grant released by the
State Government is concerned, the petitioner expressed difficulties
arising out of untimely release of ad-hoc grant by the State Government
and it would therefore be a matter of reconciliation of accounts. It is not
possible for this Court to undertake any such exercise. However, the
petitioner claims that if an installment of Rs. 2 lakhs per month is given,
this amount can be remitted back to the State Government. The proposal
is not seriously opposed by the respondents and hence we do not find
any reason not to accept such proposal.
5. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of with
liberty to the respondents to recover excess amount of grant paid to the
petitioner of R. 43,43,387/- outstanding as on this date. However the
respondents shall permit the petitioner to pay such amount in the
installments of Rs. 2 lakhs per month. The petitioner after taking
instructions, undertake to make such payment and no grievance shall be
raised in respect thereof. This installment should be remitted on or
wp.2223.03
before 10th of every succeeding month and if there is a default in
payment of such a monthly installment an interest @ 8% from the date
of such default shall be chargeable.
6. In view of above, the learned counsel for the petitioner
seeks permission to withdraw Civil Application No. 895/2017.
Permission is granted, with liberty to the petitioner to agitate such
issues before the appropriate authority.
JUDGE JUDGE
sahare
