Kerala High Court
Dr. Km Navas vs The Regional Provident Fund ... on 22 May, 2024
Author: Amit Rawal
Bench: Amit Rawal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.
WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MAY 2024 / 1ST JYAISHTA, 1946
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 15.01.2024 IN WP(C) NO.32336 OF
2023 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER:
DR. KM NAVAS,
AGED 57 YEARS
EXECUTIVE TRUSTEE,
KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST (KMCT)
MANASSERY, KOZHIKODE - KERALA, PIN - 673602
BY ADVS.
K.ANAND
HUSSAIN KOYA VALIYAVEEDAKATH
BENNY ANTONY PAREL
AMEER SALIM
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS
1 THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER,
EPF ORGANISATION,
SUB REGIONAL OFFICE BHAVISHYA NIDHI BHAVAN ERANHIPALAM,
KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673006
2 RECOVERY OFFICER,
EPF ORGANISATION, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE BHAVISHYA NIDHI
BHAVAN ERANHIPALAM,
KOZHIKODE - KERALA, PIN - 673006
3 EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION,
REPRESENTED BY THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER
EPF ORGANISATION, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE,
BHAVISHYA NIDHI BHAVAN, ERANHIPALAM,
KOZHIKODE - KERALA, PIN - 673006
4 UNION BANK OF INDIA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER MANASSERY BRANCH KOZHIKODE -
KERALA., PIN - 673602
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
2
BY ADVS.
ABRAHAM P.MEACHINKARA
ASP.KURUP
SADCHITH.P.KURUP(K/1419/2002)
C.P.ANIL RAJ(K/872/2007)
SIVA SURESH(K/2688/2022)
RESHMA RAJ(K/1150/2021)
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
04.04.2024, THE COURT ON 22.05.2024 DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
3
JUDGMENT
Amit Rawal, J.
Appellant/petitioner is the Chairman and Managing
Trustee of Kunhitharuvai Memorial Charitable Trust. The
object of the Trust is to run educational institutions of all
kinds and social service institutions such as orphanages,
health clinics, hospitals etc. In December 2015, proceeding
under Section 7A of the EPF & MP Act, 1952 was initiated on
the basis of the report of the Enforcement Officers and
without conducting a proper hearing, an ex parte order
dated 29.01.2016 was passed. The aforementioned order
was assailed before this Court in W.P.(C).No.6744/2016.
This Court vide judgment dated 25.02.2016 set aside the
said order by issuing directions to the respondents therein to
furnish all the addresses of trustees and adhere to the
provisions of the Act. Again the proceedings when
commenced, the procedure was not followed, necessitating
the petitioner to approach this Court in W.P.(C).
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
No.14175/2016. This Court vide judgment dated 08.04.2016
disposed of the writ petition with direction to the petitioner
to peruse the records available on 12.04.2016 and take
photocopy of the documents if needed. Respondents therein
were directed to give 10 days' further time for hearing in the
matter and thereafter no adjournment should be granted.
The 1st respondent was also directed to full hearing of the
parties to arrive at a decision without delay. As per the
contentions the Provident Fund Commissioner acted in
undue haste in not entertaining the application dated
22.04.2016, which was filed after having put in appearance
on receipt of the communication dated 21.04.2016. In the
aforementioned application, eight documents were sought to
be produced from the respondent and thereafter again on
same very date an application was submitted to issue
summons directing three Enforcement Officers to attend
enquiry for the purpose of eliciting the truth by cross
examination. Both the applications had not been decided
independently, but, vide impugned order are deemed to be
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
rejected on the ground that whatever the version in shape of
the documents the petitioner relied upon had been taken on
record, therefore, there was no need of cross-examination of
the Enforcement Officers. The powers under Sub-Section 2
of Section 7A of the EPF & MP Act, 1952, is akin to civil court
where production of documents, attendance of the witness
and cross examination are sine -qua - non.
2. Keeping in view the aforementioned background,
order dated 30.05.2016 under Section 7A of the Employees
Provident Fund Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, was
challenged in the writ petition bearing No.19996/2016 dated
02.03.2022. The stand of the respondent-organisation was
that the orders passed from time to time were legal and
justified for the reason that the appellant/petitioner did not
at any point of time availed remedy of appeal in order to
avoid the deposit of statutory amount. This Court
considering the rival contentions of the parties, disposed of
the writ petition in the following manner:
"12. Without commenting further on the merits of
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
the matter which may not affect either of the parties to
the lis, I set aside the order Ext.P10, allow the writ
petition and remit the matter to the Provident Fund
Commissioner to undertake the exercise in terms of the
observations hereinabove and the following directions:
i) Respondents shall serve a notice to the
petitioner or authorized representative to appear
before the authority on a particular date.
ii) On appearance, petitioner shall move an
application for production of the documents or an
application for admission and denial of certain
documents or serve interrogatives, which shall be duly
replied by the respondents.
iii) After having undertaken the aforementioned
task, if any of the parties to the lis desire for
examination list of witnesses would be exchanged and
summons will be issued to the concerned witnesses
for filing affidavit and cross examination. If any of the
witnesses is found to be imbecile or disable, Provident
Fund Commissioner can always exercise the power of
issuing the commission.
iv) Provident Fund Commissioner would give five-
five effective opportunities to the parties after
exercise of the production of documents is over, for
the purpose of leading the evidence within two
months each and conclude the trial and pass order
within a period of six months."
3. Pursuant to the order aforementioned direction,
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
hearings were granted by the organization. On receipt of the
next order, on 13.06.2022 notice under Section 7A was
issued for fixing the date. Hearing was commenced resulted
into the impugned order dated 23.01.2023. The said order
was assailed before the Single Bench of this Court on
various grounds. Noticing the predicament and other aspects
learned Single Bench of this Court disposed of the writ
petition in the following manner:
"8. Having considered the submissions, I am of
the view that this writ petition can be disposed of by
issuing the following directions.
(i) The 1st respondent is permitted to encash the Demand
Draft bearing No.KR/KKD/Cashier/2023-24 dated
04.10.2023 forthwith and appropriate the proceeds.
(i) The respondents shall permit the petitioner to pay the
balance amount in 24 equal monthly installments, the first
of which shall be payable on 15th of March, 2024.
(ii) The respondents shall keep the coercive proceedings, if
any, initiated against the petitioner in abeyance if the
petitioner complies with the conditions and directions
above and continues to pay the amount as ordered by this
Court without any default.
(iii) On the petitioner committing default of payment of
any installment as ordered above, the respondents shall
be entitled to recommence the recovery proceedings.
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
This writ petition is disposed of."
4. The aforementioned order has been assailed in the
present appeal and this Court confronted the counsel with
regard to the maintainability of appeal as concession of
payment of amount due was ordered to be paid in
instalments. Noticing his contention, this Court on
12.02.2024 passed the following detailed order:
"This is the third round of litigation whereby
appellant has been made liable to pay the amount of
contribution of Rs.3,22,00,000/- (Rupees three crores and
twenty two lakhs only). Rs.75,00,000/- (Rupees seventy
five lakhs only) has already been remitted. Only when
proceedings under Section 8F of the Act were initiated,
appellant came to know that there was some order. The
alleged acknowledgments attached along with the counter
have not actually been received by the Trust. Appellant
has sought the indulgence of this Court before the Single
Bench, also to permit him to file appeal when, for the first
time, the order dated 23rd of January, 2023 of the
assessing authority was attached to the counter affidavit.
There was an interim stay by the Single Judge, but later
on the writ petition has been dismissed by relying upon
those acknowledgments the veracity of which was
doubted by the appellant. It is further contended that the
observation of making payment in installments, in fact,
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
could not have been entertained for the reason that the
appellant had been disputing the liability from the day
one.
2. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the EPF submitted that the appellant was in
knowledge of the order and the limitation for filing the
appeal had already elapsed. Though Ext.P12 notice was
issued on 11th of May, 2023, writ petition was filed in
September, 2023. There is no provision for condonation of
delay of that period. Therefore, the remedy of appeal
would not be available at this stage. Even otherwise the
premises were again inspected on 28.11.2022 and the
order impugned was based upon that inspection.
3. Per contra, Mr.Anand, learned counsel for the
appellant submitted that the copy of the report was
alleged to have been supplied by registered post and is
not understandable as to why the report and the orders
were not handed over when, on all hearing dates,
representative of the Trust had been appearing. This
creates a doubt.
4. Issue notice before admission. Dr.Abraham P
Meachinkara, Standing Counsel takes notice for EPFO.
Two weeks' time is granted to the respondents to place
the records to the court to mete out the objections raised.
Post on 26.2.2024. Till such time there shall be an
interim stay of further proceedings in Exts.P12 and P13."
In response to the aforementioned order, organization has
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
filed a counter affidavit.
5. Mr.K.Anand, learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the appellant/petitioner submitted that the respondent
issued notice dated 13.06.2022 under Section 7A fixing the
date as 28.06.2022 for enquiry and proceedings were
subsequently considered on following dates; 28.06.2022,
12.07.2022, 19.07.2022, 26.07.2022, 10.08.2022,
25.08.2022, 01.09.2022, 02.09.2022, 15.09.2022,
28.09.2022 and 02.11.2022. But from the record, it is
evident that it was duly contesting the case but for the
reason best known, the respondent did not supply of the
copy of the impugned order passed under Section 7A and
alleged in the counter that the order was sent by registered
post and acknowledged by a person is only a plea to escape
the judicial review for the reason that appellant has a good
case and if given liberty to file a statutory appeal under
Section 7(I) of the EPF Act is sanguine of the success of the
same owing to various grounds including the number of the
employees and liability. In all the proceedings representative
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
of the appellant had been appearing and seeking leave. All
the daily orders were being sent by e-mail; for the reason
best known the impugned order was not sent by e-mail but
only by registered post and the receipt of the same is under
serious dispute which can be agitated in appeal if permitted.
Limitation to file the appeal would arise only from the date
of knowledge of the order which came to notice only when
the proceedings of recovery were initiated. In other words,
appellant acquired the knowledge of the order first time
when the respondent-organisation filed the counter affidavit
which would be on 05.02.2024 and in case the period is
calculated as provided under the Tribunal (Procedure) Rules,
1997, limitation of 60+60 days would be expiring only in
April, 2024, and not from the date of passing of the order or
dispatch of the same by registered post.
6. During the pendency of the writ petition, when the
recovery proceedings attaching an amount of
Rs.1,08,00,000/- (Rupees one crore eight lakhs only) were
initiated. Pursuant to the direction of the Court, an amount
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
of Rs.1,06,52,970/- (Rupees one crore six lakhs fifty two
thousand nine hundred seventy only) had already been
deposited.
7. On the other hand, Mr.Abrham K. Meachinkara,
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent
opposed the aforementioned prayer and submitted that the
limitation to file the appeal is already over as the appellant
had the knowledge of the order dated 23.01.2023 which was
received by AD card on 13.02.2023 and by taking that date
limitation to file the appeal expired on 12.06.2023. The
provision of Limitation Act is not applicable and therefore
appeal is hopelessly time barred/belatedly. Appellant is
playing hide and seek with the Court in order to avoid the
payment and had been challenging the matter at the drop of
the hat. The organisation complied with the direction of this
Court in letter and spirit and there is no scope for
interference/judicial review; otherwise also writ appeal
would not be maintainable as appellant/petitioner had
undertaken to pay the amount in instalments.
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
8. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties
and appraised paper book.
9. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for
the appellant had undertaken to deposit the balance amount
of Rs.2,14,32,850/- (Rupees two crore fourteen lakhs thirty
two thousand eight hundred fifty only) and in that regard
filed an application along with copy of demand draft. This
Court on 02.04.2024 noticing the facts passed the following
order:
Mr. K. Anand, learned Counsel appearing on behalf
of the appellant, submitted that as per previous order of
this Court, reflecting the intention of his client to deposit
the amount, with liberty to file an appeal, an application
for receiving additional evidence has been given, enclosing
copy of demand draft (Rs.2,14,32,855/- (Rupees two
crore fourteen lakh thirty two thousand eight hundred fifty
five only) dated 30.03.2024) deposited in the account of
PF organization. The same is taken on record and is
ordered to be registered.
2. The learned Counsel representing the Employees'
Provident Fund Organization do not deny receipt of the
same.
3. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant
seeks the indulgence of this Court for permission to file an
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
appeal by taking all the pleas available as per law.
4. On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for
the Employees' Provident Fund Organization, raised
objection regarding the maintainability of the appeal, as it
is ex facie barred by the law of limitation by referring to
events referred in the counter statement filed before the
Single Bench.
5. The contention of the appellant is that all the
other orders have been either supplied by hand or through
e-mail but the impugned order was by registered post and
the person who received the same was not authorised.
Only when recovery proceedings were initiated, cause of
action accrued to file the writ petition and only in the
counter, the impugned order was enclosed. We deem it
appropriate to call upon the counsel for the appellant to
give a list of dates and events of the hearing, in order to
ascertain whether the appellant would be debarred from
filing the appeal, in view of the non applicability of Section
5 of the Limitation Act.
Post on 04.04.2024. The interim order will continue
till then. The question of submission of the electronic
challan will be considered on the next posting date."
10. The only point to be considered is whether the
appellant can be permitted to avail the remedy of statutory
appeal and in case it is barred by way of limitation as
prescribed under Rule 7 of the Tribunal (Procedure) Rules,
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
1997, or not. As per Section 7(I) of 1952 Act, any order
passed under Section 7A of the Act is assailable by an
appeal and limitation to file the appeal provided under
Section 7 (I) of 1952 Act and Rule 7 of the Tribunal Rules
reads as under:
7-I. Appeals to Tribunal.--(1) Any person aggrieved by a
notification issued by the Central Government, or an order
passed by the Central Government or any authority, under
the proviso to sub-section (3), or sub-section (4), of section
1, or section 3, or sub-section (1) of section 7A, or section
7B
[except an order rejecting an application for review
referred to in sub-section (5) thereof], or section 7C, or
section 14B, may prefer an appeal to a Tribunal against such
notification or order.
(2) Every appeal under sub-section (1) shall be filed in
such form and manner, within such time and be
accompanied by such fees, as may be prescribed."
Rule 7. Fee, time for filing appeal, deposit of amount due on
filing appeal.--
(1) Every appeal filed with the Registrar shall be
accompanied by a fee of Rupees five hundred to be remitted
in the form of Crossed Demand Draft on a nationalized bank
in favour of the Registrar of the Tribunal and payable at the
main branch of that Bank at the station where the seat of
the said Tribunal situate.
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
(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 the Tribunal unless he has deposited with
the Tribunal a Demand Draft payable in the Fund and
bearing 75% 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."
11. The point to be pondered is as to whether the
appellant/petitioner acquired the knowledge of the
impugned order dated 23.01.2023 only when it was
attached for the first time in the counter affidavit filed in the
pending writ petition which was filed on 30.09.2023 when
the prosecution notice was issued by the Assistant Provident
Fund Commissioner by attaching certain amount or from
the date of receipt of the acknowledgment card dated
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
13.02.2023 as per the submissions of the organization.
12. To answer the aforementioned controversy, it
would be appropriate to extract the chronological events
after the demand by this Court:
1 13-06-2022 Notice under section 7A was issued fixing
28-06-2022 for inquiry
2 28-06-2022 (1) Shri Suraj P., Manager, HR of the
establishment appeared.
(2) Directions given in the judgment in
WPC 19996 of 2016 was explained to the
representative in order to proceed further
in the case.
(3) Shri Suraj P stated that he will file his
statement/contentions along with
documents through mail and also
requested opportunity to produce due to
volume.
(4) the inquiry was adjourned to 12-07-
3 12-07-2022 (1) Shri Suraj P. HR Manager appeared for
the establishment. The employer
representative stated that due to certain
health issues he could not prepare the
written statement/contentions as advised
previously and requested for one week
time.
(2) Case was adjourned 19-07-2022
4 19-07-2022 (1) None appeared for establishment. An
e-mail dated 18-07-2022 was received
from establishment seeking adjournment
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
for seven days.
(2) Case was adjourned and posted for
26-07-2022
5 26-07-2022 (1) Shri Suraj P., HR Manager appeared
and requested more time as most of staff
are not well and submitted a letter by e-
mail dated 26-07-2022.
(2) Case was adjourned for 10-08-2022
6 10-08-2022 (1) Shri Suraj P appeared and submitted
that statement was still under preparation
and will be mailed on that day itself
(2) Fifth opportunity was not availed by
the representative of the establishment
(3) Case was adjourned for 25-08-2022
7 25-08-2022 (1) Case was adjourned due to
administrative exigencies
(2) Adjourned to 01-09-2022, which was
informed to establishment.
8 01-09-2022 (1) Representative of Establishment did
not appeared
(2) Department contacted the
Representative of Establishment over
phone and he requested time till next day
for mailing their statement/representation
(3) case adjourned to 02-09-2022
9 02-09-2022 (1) Shri Suraj P appeared and stated that
they have made a representation and
prepared due statement as per their
calculation.
(2) The mailed contents on examination
was found for the period involved from
(3) Were as the inquiry was for the period
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
(4) Time was sought to produce records
and the same was allowed
(5) The employer was directed to produce
all relevant record as per notice dated 13-
06-2022 and was posted to 15-09-2022
10 15-09-2022 (1) Shri Suraj appeared and produced
certain records with reference to the dues
calculation to the statement dated 11-08-
2022, which was submitted on the
previous date of hearing.
(2) On verification, it was found that
records were not tallying with other
records like Balance Sheet.
(3) It was seen that Statement made is
only for the period 09/2014 to 09/2015 as
already indicated in Daily Order Sheet
dated 02-09- 2022.
(4) For the period 03/2004 to 08/2014
neither any statement nor any records
were produced.
(5) Representative sought time to check
and requested two week time.
6)Case was adjourned to 28-09-2022
11 28-09-2022 (1) Shri Suraj represented the
establishment and requested one more
opportunity for four weeks time
(2) Case was adjourned finally to 02-11-
2022 with a direction, if there is no
representation, case will be disposed of
based on available records on the file
12 02-11-2022 (1) Shri Suraj represented for
establishment
(2) The Representative of the
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
establishment has filed a statement dated
28-10-2022 along with Annexure in
respect of the three institution viz., (a)
KMCT Trust Ayureveda College, (b) KMCT
Arts and Science College, (c) KMCT
Kuttipuram Law College.
(3) The representative admitted the dues
in respect of following institution as per
the 7A order dated 01-06-2016 viz., (a)
KMCT Head Office, Pooladikunnu, (b)
KMCT Collegem Pooladikunnu, (c) KMCT
Business, (d) KMCT Dental College, (e)
College of Architecture, (f College of
Nursing and School of Nursing, (g) KMCT
College of Pharmaceutical Science.
(4) The representative neither defended
nor admitted the dues in respect of
following institutions viz., (a) KMCT
College of Eng for Women, (b) Poly
Technic. (c) KMCT Debtak - Regular Staff,
(d) KMCT College of Architecture, (e)
KMCT Teacher Training Institute, (f)
Nursing School, (g) Nursing College and
(h) KMCT B.Ed. College
13 28-11-2022 Enforcement Officer's Report
14 30-11-2022 Enforcement Officer's Report dated 28-11-
2022 along with Daily Order Sheet was
forwarded to the Establishment through
email.
Enforcement's Officer Report was
submitted and provided. Representative of
Establishment requested for physical
verification of Records and was allowed.
They were allowed to verify records on 01-
11-2022 from 10.00 a.m. onwards and on
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
completion proceedings will be drawn,
15 01-11-2022 Employer did not avail the opportunity for
perusing the records
16 28-12-2022 Employer was afforded a final opportunity
to file their statement, if any by 28-12-
17 16-01-2023 As a last chance, employer was given an
opportunity to submit their written
statement if any, by 16-01-2023 be
scrutinizing the records well before the
date
18 23-01-2023 7A proceedings was passed assessing dues
for the period 03/2004 to 09/2015 for Rs.
3,22,86,287/-
19 13-02-2023 AD Card received back acknowledging the
receipt of 7 A proceedings dated 13-02-
20 13-03-2023 Letter issued informing the default in
remittance and to remit the amount within
15 days
21 30-03-2023 Order of Attachment under section 8F of
the EPF Act issued to The Manager,
Andhra Bank, Mamassery Branch, Calicut
22 13-04-2023 Certificate under section 8 of the EPF Act
issued by the Assessing Officer to the
Recovery Officer
23 11-05-2023 Form No. EPF CP1 Notice of demand to the
Defaulter issued by the Recovery Officer
24 18-09-2023 Reminder to the Manager, Andhra Bank
Manassery Branch for non-compliance of
the order of attachment issued by APFC
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
25 18/09/23 Prohibitory Order issued to the Manager,
Union Bank Manassery Branch, Kozhikode
issued by Recovery Officer
26 20-09-2023 Prohibitory Order issued to the Manager,
Union Bank Main Branch, Kozhikode issued
by Recovery Officer
27 26-09-2023 Prohibitory Order issued to the Manager,
Union Bank Kallai Branch, Kozhikode
issued by Recovery Officer
28 27-09-2023 Prosecution Notice issued by APFC to the
Petitioner
29 30-09-2023 Writ Petition No. 32336 of 2023 filed by
the Petitioner
30 15-01-2024 Disposal of Writ Petition No. 32336 of
2023 availing Installment facility
31 08-02-2014 Writ Appeal No. 189 of 2024 against
judgment dated 15-1-2024 in WPC No.
32336 of 2023
13. On perusal of the daily orders extracted above, it
is evident that on most of the occasions the representative
of the establishment had been appearing, seeking time and
even asking for the inspection of the record, even the copy
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
of the enforcement officer report who conducted the enquiry
after the remand on 28.12.2022 was supplied through e-
mail. But when the matter was heard on 16.01.2023, the
date of pronouncement was not notified to the
appellant/petitioner. Be that as it may. Even if it had been
notified it is intriguing that why the order under Section 7A
dated 23.01.2023 assessing the dues for the period 03/04 to
09/2015 of Rs.3,22,86,287/- (Rupees three core twenty two
lakhs eighty six thousand two hundred eighty seven only)
was not sent through email or supplied to the
representatives of the establishment, instead order of
attachment was issued on 30.03.2023. The contention of the
appellant/petitioner throughout before the Single Bench and
before us is that alleged AD card received by acknowledging
the receipt of 7A proceedings on 13.02.2023 was by a
person who was not duly authorized. It is yet to be proved
in an appeal which is last court of fact and law. Appellant
came to know about the passing of the order when
prosecution notice was issued on 27.09.2023, the writ
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
petition was filed on 30.09.2023. Respondent - Organisation
filed the counter attaching the order. The knowledge of the
order was from 05.12.2023 when it was disclosed for the
first time in the counter affidavit and the limitation of 60+60
days would expire on 04.06.2024. It is settled law that the
period spent in a wrong court is liable to be excluded by
taking the aid of provisions of Section 14 of the Limitation
Act. We are thus prima facie of the view that the
orgainisation has not been able to satisfy the conscience of
the Court the manner and mode in which the impugned
order had been communicated to the appellant/petitioner as
all the orders were either given by hand or through e-mail
but not the impugned order. All these factors much less
points on merits could be considered in case the appellant is
provided the opportunity of appeal in accordance with law
by taking limitation from 05.12.2023. Since the appellant
has already deposited the entire amount in case the appeal
is permitted the Appellate Court could decide the
justification of the demand and other factors which the
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
appellant reserve the right to take before the appellate
authority. Accordingly, this writ appeal is disposed of by
relegating the appellant to file the appeal by counting the
period of limitation from the date of acquisition of knowledge
of the impugned order dated 23.01.2023 from 05.12.2023
by excluding the period spent in the writ petition and the
period for preparation of certified copy of the judgment.
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL
JUDGE
Sd/-
EASWARAN S.
JUDGE
nak
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
RESPONDENT ANNEXURES
Annexure R1(A) True copy of the Final Report on Squad
Inspection of KMCT group of Institution
vide No. KR/KKD/SQUAD/KMCT/20I5 dated
11-12-2015
Annexure R1(C) True copy of the 7A proceedings dated
1-6-2016 with respect to the KMCT
Establishment
Annexure R1(D) True copy of the Enforcement Officers
Report dated 28-11-2022
Annexure R1(E) True copy of the email dated 30-11-2022
forwarding Enforcement Officers Report
dated 28-11-2022 along with Daily Order
Sheet
Annexure R1(B) True copy of the RTI reply providing
report submitted by the EOs for the
period 3/2004 to 9 /2015 vide Letter No
KR/KKD/23276/EnflI(2) RTI Reply/2016-17
dated 5-4-2016
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 True copy of the e-mail communication
dated 03.11.2022 attaching the daily
order sheet No: KR/KKD/23276/2022 dated
02.11.2022 forwarded to the appellant
Annexure 2 True copy of the e-mail communication
dated 05.12.2022 attaching the daily
order in Diary No: 341/2022 dated
01.12.2022 forwarded to the appellant
Annexure 3 True copy of the e-mail communication
dated 29.12.2022 attaching the daily
order in Diary No: 341/2022 dated
28.12.2022 forwarded to the appellant
WA NO. 189 OF 2024
Annexure 4 True copy of the e-mail communication
dated 3.10.2023 attaching the
prohibitory order No:
KR/KKD/23276/Recovery/2023 dated
18.9.2023
Annexure 5 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND DRAFT NO. 1701
DATED 30.01.2024 ISSUED BY THE AXIS
BANK MALAPARAMBA BRANCH
Annexure 6 TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER ISSUED
BY THE APPELLANT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT
DATED 01.04.2024
