Telangana High Court
M/S.Vbc Ferro Alloys Ltd vs Union Of India on 24 June, 2025
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.12539 of 2025
ORDER:
This writ petition has been filed seeking the following prayer:-
"to declare the action of the Respondent No.2 in not considering the
representation submitted by the petitioner dated 06.01.2025 and
07.01.2025 in true spirit instead passing various coercive orders as
arbitrary, illegal, unjust, violative of principles of natural justice and
consequently direct the Respondent No.2 to allow the Petitioner to
repay the outstanding dues in twenty (20) monthly installments."
2. Brief facts in this writ petition are that petitioner is a company
registered under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956, under name and
style as "M/s.VBC Ferro Alloys Ltd", engaged in manufacturing of ferro
alloys. The case of the petitioner is that it has been regularly paying all the
statutory dues, including the provident funds and had never been a defaulter
from the last 30 years. However, due to severe power shortage in the state
during 2012-2013 and due to restrictions by DISCOMS, there was hike in the
tariff, with no price rectification of final product and the petitioner company
had suffered losses, hence, the unit was closed in the month of August, 2013.
Thereafter, the petitioner company on 30.06.2014, under Section 13(2) of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 read with Rule 60 of the then A.P. Industrial
Rules, 1958 entered into an agreement with the labour union representatives
and settled the wages of the workers. Further case is that respondent No.2
issued notice regarding the pending provident fund dues of the workers.
Thereafter, the petitioner apprised the fact of settlement with the workers and
after due consideration, the respondent No.2 vide order bearing
No.TS/PTC/ENF/17192/4741 dated 08.05.2015 directed the petitioner to pay
Rs.1,21,84,232/- towards assessment for the period from 04/2012 to 12/2013,
within 15 days from the date of receipt of the order. Subsequently the
petitioner leaving an amount of Rs.7,67,783/- out of Rs.1,21,84,232/- paid an
amount of Rs.1,13,94,988/-, and inspite of the same, respondent No.2
under Section 14B and 7Q of Employees Provident Fund
and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 issued order
No.AP/SRO/PTC/17192/DPCell/14B/Orders/2014/36806 dated 06.11.2015,
wherein respondent No.2 imposing interest and penalty directed the
petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.93,48,695/-. Thereafter, the petitioner on
22.06.2016 made representation and requested respondent No.2 to waive the
penalties, however, respondent No.2 issued the proclamation of sale
proceedings bearing No.AP/SRO/PTC/17192/Recy/2016/7514 dated
16.02.2016. Challenging the same, petitioner filed W.P.No.9443 of 2016 and
this Court as an interim measure directed the respondent No.2 therein to
consider the petitioner's representation dated 22.02.2016 within a period of
two(2) weeks. However, the said representation was disposed of and without
giving an opportunity to the petitioner another notice bearing
No.TS/RO/PTC/Recy(Z-1)/17192/2023-24/97 dated 03.07.2023 was issued
to the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that the petitioner vide
representations dated 07.12.2023 and 09.09.2024 reiterated the factual aspects,
however, without considering the same the respondent No.2 issued show
cause notice bearing No.TS/RO/PTC/17192/Recy-CP 25/2024/589 dated
22.11.2024, to show cause why a warrant of arrest should not be issued.
Aggrieved by the same, petitioner filed W.P.No.34950 of 2024 and the same
was dismissed by this Court on 12.12.2024. Challenging, the order dated
12.12.2024 in W.P.No.34950 of 2024, petitioner preferred W.A.No.1439 of 2024
and the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court vide Judgment dated 31.12.2024
passed the following order:-
"10. In view of the aforesaid submission and in the facts and
circumstances of the case, the order dated 12.12.2024 passed by the
learned Single Judge in W.P.No.34950 of 2024 is modified.
11. The appellant is granted the liberty to file a reply the notice dated
22.11.2024 on or before 06.01.2025. It is further directed that the
appellant shall appear before the Regional Provident Fund
Commissioner on 06.01.2025 along with the reply. The Regional
Provident Fund Commissioner, after considering the reply submitted by
the appellant, is granted the liberty to proceed further in the matter in
accordance with law."
4. Subsequently, the petitioner submitted a reply on 06.01.2025, wherein
the erstwhile director Sri.PV Rao, under duress and coercion agreed to pay an
amount of Rs.10,00,000/- towards the penalty and interest dues and issued
PDCs for the balance amount of Rs.25,16,333/-. Learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that the petitioner issued a demand draft of Rs.2,00,000/-
towards interest under Section 7Q and vide representations dated 06.01.2025
and 07.01.2025 requested respondent Nos.2 and 4 to recover the balance
amount in twenty (20) instalments. It is further submitted that the respondent
No.2, without considering the petitioner's representation dated 06.01.2025 and
07.01.2025 issued order Nos.TS/OTC/RECY/Z-1/17192/8FOrder/2024
dated 16.01.2025 and TS/PTC/Recy/Z-1/17192/8Forder/2024/677 dated
31.12.2024 to respondent Nos.5 and 6 to remit an amount of Rs.1,06,31,369/-
from the petitioner's account. Aggrieved by the same, present writ petition is
filed.
5. Though various grounds are raised in this writ petition, learned
counsel for the petitioner restricts his prayer seeking a direction to respondent
No.4 to consider the petitioner's representations dated 07.01.2025 and recover
the balance amount in twenty (20) instalments.
6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and none appeared for
respondents.
7. Upon perusal of the proceeding sheet, it is noticed that on 28.04.2025,
29.04.2025 and 10.06.2025, learned standing counsel appearing for respondent
Nos.2 and 4 sought time for getting instructions and filing counter. However,
till date neither instructions are placed nor counter is filed.
8. Having considered the above facts and circumstances, in view of the
submission made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this writ petition is disposed
of directing the respondent No.4 to dispose the petitioner's representations
dated 06.01.2025 and 07.01.2025 and after giving fair opportunity of hearing to
the petitioner, the responded No.4 shall pass appropriate orders strictly in
accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period
of two (02) weeks from today and communicate the same to the petitioner.
9. Accordingly this writ petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous
applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
_________________________________
JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
Date: 24.06.2025
Note:-
Issue C.C by tomorrow.
B/o
SU
