1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 14.03.2011 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE K. SUGUNA AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. ARUMUGHASWAMY W.A. (MD) No.360 of 2011 & M.P. (MD) No.2 of 2011 The South India Mines and Mineral Industries Limited represented by its Executive Director Sri. R. Rajagopal No.315, Narayana Nagar Sankarnagar 627 357 Tirunelveli District Appellant vs. 1 Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal (Ministry of Labour and Employment) Core II, IV Floor Laxmi Nagar District Centre Laxmi Nagar Delhi, Camp: Coimbatore 2 The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Employee's Provident Fund Organisation Sub-Regional Office Bhavishya Nidhi Bhawan NGO "B" Colony Tirunelveli 627 007 Respondents Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent challenging the order dated 25.01.2011 passed by a learned Single Judge in M.P. (MD) No.1 of 2011 in W.P. (MD) No.933 of 2011. Prayer in MP(MD) NO.1/11 in W.P.(MD)No.933/11 Miscellaneous Petition filed praying to grant an order of interim injunction restraining the Second respondent his, men, agents or anybody acting him, not to take coercive steps to recover the amounts, including issuing of any garnishee order or such other actions, pending disposal of the writ petition (MD) No.933 of 2011, which was filed praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for records relating from the 1st Respondent culminating in the order dated 28.12.2010 hearing Ref.No.107/13/2008 and quash the same and direct them to waive the damages for the various periods of defaults in terms of office memorandum dated 29.05.1990. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 For appellant Mr. Aravind Subramaniam For respondent 2 Mr. K. Murali Shankar JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by K. SUGUNA, J.) This writ appeal is filed as against the order dated 25.01.2011 passed in M.P. (MD) No.1 of 2011 in W.P. (MD) No.933 of 2011. 2. By the above said order dated 25.01.2011, the learned Single Judge has granted an order of interim injunction on condition that the appellant/writ petitioner has to pay 50% of the impugned demand, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that order. 3. It is the case of the appellant/writ petitioner that even the appellate authority has committed a prima facie error, that is to say, in all the other cases, payment of damages was considered and orders were passed in favour of the employers, whereas, as far as the case in hand is concerned, a different treatment is extended, consequently, when that order passed by the appellate authority is prima facie illegal, based on that, the question of payment of 50% does not arise at all. Apart from this, according to the learned counsel, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2008 1 LLJ 814 (SC), Employees' State Insurance Corporation vs. H.M.T. Ltd. and another, unless there is mens rea with regard to delay or non-payment of contribution, the question of payment of damages does not arise at all. 4. All the above aspects can be gone into only at the time of final hearing of the writ petition and not during the interim application stage. However, taking note of the fact that the appellant/writ petitioner had already paid the contribution and also interest and now, the issue relates only to damages, the order of the learned Single Judge is modified as, on payment of 25% of the demand with regard to damages on or before 31.03.2011, there shall be an order of interim stay of the order impugned in the writ petition. In the event of failure on the part of the appellant/writ petitioner to pay the said amount, the order of interim stay shall stand automatically vacated without any further reference to this Court. Office is directed to post the writ petition for final disposal in the second week of April 2011. With the above direction and observation, this writ appeal is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Crl.side) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 To 1 Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal (Ministry of Labour and Employment) Core II, IV Floor Laxmi Nagar District Centre Laxmi Nagar, Delhi, Camp: Coimbatore 2 The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Employee's Provident Fund Organisation Sub-Regional Office Bhavishya Nidhi Bhawan NGO "B" Colony, Tirunelveli 627 007 Copy to The Section Officer, Writ Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. (To Post W.P.933/11 during the second week of April 2011) cad SR : 15.03.2011 : 3p/4c : IT W.A. (MD) No.360 of 2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/