Steel Authority Of India Limited vs Employees Provident Fund ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 57 Cal

                  IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                 CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
                         APPELLATE SIDE

  Ct. 22
Item Nos.4
06.01.2021
 (suvendu)

                                 WPA 7511 OF 2020
                                      With
                                  CAN 1 of 2020

                     Steel Authority of India Limited
                                    Vs.
               Employees Provident Fund Organization & Ors.



                                 (Via Video Conference)



                     Mr. L.K.Gupta
                     Mr. Arjun Ray Mukherjee
                                        .................for the petitioner

                     Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta
                                        ............for the Respondent no.2

Learned senior advocate, Mr. L.K.Gupta, appearing

for the petitioner submits that they have cleared the dues

as demanded by the Provident Fund Authorities but on

principle they have challenged the letter and the order of

the Employees' Provident Fund Organization dated 15 th

January, 2020.

The question raised by the petitioner in this matter

is that Welfare Allowance does not come within the

purview of basic wages and in support of this they have

relied upon a judgment reported in 2019 SCC Online SC

291 (Regional Provident Commissioner, West Bengal -Vs-

Vivekananda Vidyamandir & Ors.).

Learned advocate, Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta, appearing

for the Provident Fund Authorities submits that affidavit

is required to be filed in this matter.

Considering the question raised in this matter, I feel

that without exchange of affidavits this matter cannot be

heard and the question of law raised here cannot be

decided keeping in mind the facts and circumstances of

the case. Steel Authority of India Limited in its usual

fairness has paid the entire money (which according to

Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta, learned advocate appearing for the

Provident Fund Authorities is required to be verified)

nobody as of now can say that the persons for whom such

welfare measures have declared will be deprived of their

money due to pendency of the matter. Therefore, I direct

the respondent authorities to file their affidavit in

opposition within four weeks from date and reply, if any,

thereto be filed within two weeks thereafter. After expiry

of the above period when the mater will be treated as a

matter ready for hearing, parties are granting liberty to

mention the matter for inclusion in the list, after the said

period.

(Abhijit Gangopadhyay, J.)