M/S. Southern Cooling Towers ... vs Regional Provident Fund ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 1630 Cal

Item no. 01


               IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                APPELLATE SIDE

Present:
The Hon'ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam
              And
The Hon'ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya


                                 MAT 1781 of 2022
                                       with
                               IA No. CAN 2 of 2022

                 M/s. Southern Cooling Towers Private Limited
                                      vs.
                Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-1 & anr.


Appearance:
For the Appellants       :   Mr. Farooque Ali
                             Mr. Shahrukh Raja
                             Mr. Faizan Md. Zafar
                             Mr. S. Mohta

For the Respondents      :   Ms. Aparna Banerjee

Heard on                 : 13.03.2023

Judgment on              : 13.03.2023.


T.S. Sivagnanam J.:

This intra-Court appeal filed by the writ petitioner is

directed against the order dated 14 th September, 2022 passed by the

learned Single Judge in WPA 16855/2022. The appellant is aggrieved by

the order not in entirety but only with regard to that portion of the order

which directs the appellant to deposit a sum of Rs. 30,00,000/- with the

first respondent within a time frame to enable the appellant to approach

the Tribunal challenging the order dated 25 th August, 2021. It is not in

dispute that the statute, mainly, the Employees Provident Fund and

Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 does not provide for a pre-condition

for preferring an appeal before the Tribunal against an order passed

under Section 14B of the Act.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

We are of the view that such a precondition cannot be imposed

in a writ proceeding making it a condition precedent for filing an appeal

before the Tribunal. Therefore, the appeal is allowed and that portion of

the order passed by the learned Single Judge directing the appellant to

pre-deposit a sum of Rs. 30,00,000/- is set aside and the liberty granted

by the learned Singe Judge is preserved and the appellant is at liberty to

approach the Tribunal challenging the order dated 25.08.2021. If the

appeal is preferred within a period of three weeks from the date of

receipt of the server copy of this order, the learned Tribunal shall not

reject the appeal on the ground of limitation but shall take up the

appeal for consideration and decides the matter on merits and in

accordance with law.

Mrs. Banerjee, learned standing counsel appearing for the

respondent would submit that in the event the appellant does not prefer

an appeal within the time frame prescribed by this Court, the interest of

the respondent organization should be protected. It is needless to state

that if the appellant does not prefer an appeal within the time frame it

will be well open to the respondent organization to proceed in

accordance with law.

Thus, for the above reasons, the instant appeal is allowed

and the connected application is disposed of.

(T. S. Sivagnanam, J.)

(Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)

RP/Amitava (AR. CT.)