Research › Search › Judgment

Telangana High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 538 (TS)

Vishwa Vani v. Union of India

2022-08-18

K.LAKSHMAN

body2022
ORDER : Heard Mr. P. Venugopal, learned Senior Counsel representing Mr. P. Shanker Rao Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dr. B. Manoj Kumar, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 5. 2. Perusal of the record would reveal that respondent No.3 herein had passed an order under Section -7A of the Employees? Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short ?Act, 1952?), dated 28.04.2021. Since it is an appealable order, feeling aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner herein had filed an appeal under Section - 7-I of the Act, 1952 vide E.P.F. Appeal 35 of 2021. Along with the said appeal, the petitioner herein had also filed an application to waive the condition of deposit of 75% of the disputed amount and also stay petition. Vide order, dated 10.05.2022, the learned Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court (Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal) at Hyderabad, admitted the appeal on the condition of the petitioner remitting 40% of the assessed dues with the respondents within a period of one (01) month from the date of said order. Proof of remittance shall be produced on or before the next date of posting. The amount, if any, in excess of the amount accounted in the impugned order shall also be taken into account while computing the remittance under Section - 7 (O) of the Act, 1952. Subject to the said condition, the Tribunal has stayed the impugned order restraining the respondent from taking any coercive action for recovery. The said 40% of the amount would be Rs.4,86,21,621.20ps. 3. Since the petitioner could not comply with the said order by depositing 40% of the assessed dues, it has filed an application vide S.R. No.322 of 2022 on 08.06.2022 before the Tribunal seeking extension of time. There is no Presiding Officer in the said Tribunal. It is relevant to note that the petitioner herein had filed a writ petition vide W.P. No.15876 of 2021 challenging the order dated 25.05.2021 passed by respondent No.4 herein under Section - 7A of the Act, 1952. 4. As stated above, the Tribunal has stayed the said impugned award on condition of depositing 40% of the assessed amount, and since the petitioner herein has not complied with the said order, the respondent officials have frozen nineteen (19) accounts of the petitioner at different banks. 4. As stated above, the Tribunal has stayed the said impugned award on condition of depositing 40% of the assessed amount, and since the petitioner herein has not complied with the said order, the respondent officials have frozen nineteen (19) accounts of the petitioner at different banks. This Court vide order dated 26.10.2021 in W.P. No.15876 of 2021 directed the respondents not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner, in pursuance of the impugned order until further orders. According to the petitioner, in violation of the said order, the respondent authorities have frozen the said nineteen (19) accounts of the petitioner at different banks. Therefore, it had filed contempt application. Considering the said facts, this Court vide order dated 18.07.2022 disposed of the said writ petition granting liberty to the petitioner herein to pursue Appeal, Waiver Application, Extension Application, Stay Application and the Contempt Application. This Court also made it clear that the order passed in the said writ petition will not come in the way of petitioner in pursuing contempt application. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4, the said contempt petition vide I.A. No.1146 of 2022 is pending. 5. Perusal of the record would reveal that respondent Nos.4 and 5 have issued impugned prohibitory order dated 21.06.2022 freezing 28 accounts of the petitioner at different banks. Therefore, the present writ petition. 6. In paragraph No.11 of the writ affidavit, the petitioner herein has specifically mentioned the total amount assessed, what would be 40% of the assessed amount and the amount paid by the petitioner pursuant to the order passed by the Tribunal and the outstanding balance amount. According to Mr. P. Venugopal, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, the petitioner herein had paid Rs.2,18,37,936 and Rs.48,82,084.38ps in compliance of the aforesaid order passed by the EPFA Tribunal. According to him, outstanding balance amount is Rs.2,19,01,600.82ps. Considering the reasons explained in the writ affidavit, he seeks reasonable time to grant installments to clear the said amount by the petitioner herein. 7. Whereas, Mr. Dr.B. Manoj Kumar, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4 would submit that the demand draft/banker cheque submitted by the petitioner for Rs.5,58,694/- was returned to the Banker since there is no signature. 8. 7. Whereas, Mr. Dr.B. Manoj Kumar, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4 would submit that the demand draft/banker cheque submitted by the petitioner for Rs.5,58,694/- was returned to the Banker since there is no signature. 8. The petitioner herein has specifically explained the reasons for their non-depositing of the said amount in compliance of the order dated 10.05.2022 passed by EPFA Tribunal in EPF Appeal No.35 of 2022. The petitioner herein is a religious institution/society registered under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and it is functioning in discharge of its aims to spread ?good news of Jesus Christ to the far flung areas of the Country. 9. However, as discussed above, the petitioner herein had paid an amount of Rs.2,18,37,936/- and Rs.48,82,084.38ps. leaving balance of Rs.2,19,01,600.82ps. Considering the said facts and also the reasons mentioned by the petitioner in the writ affidavit including the fact that the petitioner herein had filed extension application vide I.A. (SR) No.322 of 2022, dated 08.06.2022 before the EPFA Tribunal before expiration of the time granted by the Tribunal in the order dated 10.05.2022 in E.PF Appeal No.35 of 2022 and that there is no Presiding Officer to consider the said application, this Court is inclined to grant reasonable time to the petitioner to deposit the said amount in compliance of the aforesaid order passed by the Tribunal. 10. In view of the above discussion, this Writ Petition is disposed of granting nine (09) Equated Monthly Installments to the petitioner to clear outstanding balance amount of Rs.2,19,01,600.82ps. The petitioner shall pay the said amount on or before 15th of every month staring from September, 2022. If the petitioner fails to pay the said amount within the aforesaid stipulated time, liberty is granted to the respondent authorities to take steps in accordance with law. Liberty is also granted to the petitioner to pursue appeal, waiver application, stay application and extension application. Liberty is also granted to the respondent authorities to claim that the petitioner herein has to deposit the said amount of Rs.4,86,21,621.20ps., towards 40% of the total assessed amount in the waiver application and extension applications before the Tribunal, and it is for the Tribunal to consider the same. 11. Liberty is also granted to the respondent authorities to claim that the petitioner herein has to deposit the said amount of Rs.4,86,21,621.20ps., towards 40% of the total assessed amount in the waiver application and extension applications before the Tribunal, and it is for the Tribunal to consider the same. 11. In view of the above observations, respondent Nos.3 to 5 are directed to forthwith take steps to defreeze the accounts of the petitioner in respondent Nos.6 to 9 banks viz., 1) A/c No 10332931494 branch code 1515; 2) A/c No 38236987586 Branch Code 00041; 3) A/c No 30005369616 Branch Code 1853; 4) A/c No 34137373146 Branch Code 11068; 5) A/c No 36538774228 Branch Code 0951; 6) A/c No 34204973760 Branch Code 3690; 7) A/c No 30005365805 Branch Code 6495; 8) A/c No 36530037456 Branch Code 7487; 9) A/c No 36546346113 Branch Code 18934; 10) A/c No 38786047385 Branch Code 0281; 11) A/c No 38770638909 Branch Code 2661; 12) A/c No 31133938739 Branch Code 17247; 13) A/c No 34320874789 Branch Code 3299; 14) A/c No 10151750252 Branch No 3273; 15) A/c No 10243576471 Branch No 7112; 16) A/c No 315340796212 Branch No 3870; 17) A/c No 10408453024 Branch No 3870; 18) A/c No 32366238849 Branch No 7112; 19) A/c No 34227439914 Branch No 15630; 20) A/c No 37608953586 Branch No 7170; 21) A/c No 37610396358 Branch Code 8028; 22) A/c No 37616562118 Branch Code 3362; 23) A/c No 37744793341 Branch Code 20333; 24) A/c No 10243576460 Branch Code 7112; 25) A/c No 31136264288 Branch Code 13152; 26) A/c No 10243663569 Branch Code 7112; 27) A/c No 34445302072 Branch Code 3375; and 28) A/c No 34227109011 Branch Code 2263. However, in the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed.