IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6597 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 6597 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 6597 OF 2008 M/s.Mahati Electrics Pvt.Ltd. ...Petitioner vs. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Pune & Anr. ...Respondents Mr.Harihar Bhave i/b. M/s.Bhave & Co. for the Petitioner. Smt.S.V. Bharucha for the Respondents. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATED : APRIL 17, 2009 DATED : APRIL 17, 2009 DATED : APRIL 17, 2009 P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. Heard Counsel for the petitioner and Counsel for the respondents. 2. By this petition, the petitioner is challenging Order passed by the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, in ATA No.607(9)/2003 dated 14th April, 2008 in which the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Competent Authority dated 30th July, 2003. 3. Counsel for the petitioner has invited my attention to the impugned order dated 30th July, 2003 - 2 - and has submitted that no reasons have been assigned by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner while giving a direction to the petitioner for the payment of an amount of Rs.2,36,309/- alongwith interest under Section 7Q which was quantified at Rs.55,676/-. 4. I have perused the said order. It is apparent that no reasons have been assigned by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner. This question has not been considered by the Appellate Tribunal. It is elementary that even a quasi-judicial authority while deciding an application is expected to give reasons for not accepting the submissions made by the parties to the said proceedings. In the present case, the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner has exercised his power which was vested in him under Section 14-B read with 7Q of the Employees Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. It is excepted, therefore, that he ought to have given reasons while awarding damages against the present petitioner. The Appellate Tribunal also has not taken into consideration this aspect. Under these circumstances, both these orders i.e. order dated 30th - 3 - July, 2003 and order dated 14th April, 2008 are set aside. The subsequent notice issued pursuant to this orders which are passed by the said authorities is also set aside. The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner shall decide the application afresh on merits after taking into consideration all the contentions raised by the petitioner including the circulars on which reliance is now placed by the petitioner herein within a period of two months today. The petitioner has already deposited the amount of Rs.2,91,985/- for the period from 1.1.97 till 30.9.99. This amount be invested in a Nationalised Bank and in the event, the petitioner succeeds, the said amount shall be returned with interest that may be accrued on the said amount as a result of investment made by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner. 5. All contentions are kept open. Writ Petition, accordingly, is disposed of. (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.)