IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2009 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 7479 of 2009(D) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S. HAILEYBURIA TEA ESTATE LTD., ELAPPARA, IDUKKI DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE CO-ORDINATOR MR. K.K.NAIR. BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH KODIANTHARA SRI.MATHEWS K.UTHUPPACHAN SRI.TERRY V.JAMES RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, SUB-REGIONAL OFFICE, CHALAKUZHY BUILDING, CMS COLLEGE ROAD, KOTTAYAM-686 011. 2. EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, 14, BHIKAJI CAMA PLACE, NEW DELHI-110 066. ADV. SRI.JOY THATTIL ITOOP, SC, EPF ORGANISA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.7479 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 11th day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is an establishment covered under the provisions of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act. On account of delay in paying the contribution that is due, by Exts.P6 & P7 orders, damages under Section 14B of the Act and interest under Section 7Q of the Act have been levied on the petitioner. 2. Aggrieved by Ext.P6 order levying damages, they have filed Ext.P8 appeal before the 2nd respondent Tribunal. Similarly, aggrieved by Ext.P7, they have filed Ext.P9 representation to the Ministry of Labour, which has not been impleaded in this writ petition. Prayer made is to direct consideration of Exts.P8 & P9. The learned standing counsel for the Organisation objects to the maintainability of Ext.P9 and contends that only the Employees Provident Fund Trust can consider the representation. The petitioner also has not pointed out any provision of law, enabling the Government of India to interfere with an order levying interest. 3. Taking into account the above, the writ petition is WP(C) No.7479/2009 -2- disposed of with the following directions:- That the 2nd respondent, before whom Ext.P8 appeal against Ext.P6 order levying damages on the petitioner under Section 14B of the Act has been filed, shall consider Ext.P8 appeal. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months of production of a copy of this judgment. 4. Taking into account the objection raised by the learned standing counsel for the respondents about the maintainability of Ext.P9, I direct that it will be open to the petitioner to approach the Employees Provident Fund Trust seeking waiver or revision of interest. This the petitioner may do within four weeks from today. It is directed that if an application is received as above, the Trust shall consider the same and pass orders thereon as expeditiously as possible. 5. In order to enable the petitioner to pursue the aforesaid remedies, I also direct that further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P6 & P7 be kept in abeyance for a period of three months from today. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg