THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.14786 of 2010 Date:28th June, 2010 Between: 1. N.Sridhar Reddy & Ors. ... Petitioners a n d 1. APSRTC, rep. by Vice Chairman & MD, Bus Bhavan Musheerabad, Hyderabad & Ors. … Respondents *** THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.14786 of 2010 ORDER: This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioners, who are 9 in number, with a prayer to issue an order/direction or writ, more particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the Proc.No.IR/2/5(2)/2007-PO-IV, dt.26.04.2010, issued by the Executive Director (A&P), APSRTC, Hyderabad-2nd respondent directing the Regional Manager, APSRTC, Karimnagar-3rd respondent to issue notice and recover both employer and employee contributions towards PF & EDLIF together with Administrative and Inspection Charges (from the date of employment of drivers or from the date of operation of bus hired to APSRTC whichever is later) from Hire Charge Bills payable to the petitioners and remit to the APSRTC EPF Trust and its consequential notice No.T2/259(I-PF)/10:RM-KR, dated 07.05.2010 issued by the 3rd respondent for deducting the EPF & EDLIF contributions from Hire Charge Bills payable to the petitioners as illegal, without jurisdiction and declare the order No.AP/295/Exemption/RO/HYD/2006, dated 05.03.2007 passed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (Exemption), Hyderabad- 4th respondent as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Section 7-A(3) of the Employees Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, and not binding on the petitioners. 2. When the writ petition came up for admission, Sri.Pottigari Sridhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for APSRTC takes notices on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 and Sri.R.N.Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (Exemption) takes notice on behalf of the 4th respondent. 3. Learned counsel appearing for both the parties submit that the issue involved in this Writ Petition has been squarely covered by the common order of this Court in W.P.Nos. 11791, 11793 and 13943 of 2010, dated 21.06.2010. Relevant portion of the said common order reads as follows: “10. Be that as it may, most of the petitioners have received individual notices as on this day where under they are called upon to submit their explanation as to why P.F. contributions cannot be deducted from the hire charges. It is the contention of the petitioners that they have not engaged more than 20 persons to come within the purview of the EPF & MP Act, 1952. After considering the explanations, the APSRTC is at liberty to pass appropriate orders. Till the explanations offered by the petitioners are considered, no amount shall be deducted from the hire charges towards EPF contributions etc. Any instructions issued to the Depot Managers deducting the PF contributions from the hire charges shall remain suspended pending enquiry. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that some of the petitioners have not yet submitted their individual explanations after receipt of such notices and therefore time may be extended to enable them to submit their explanations. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, time is extended by thirty days to the petitioners who have not submitted their explanations as on this day.” 4. Following the decision of this Court in the above writ petitions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ B. SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:28th June, 2010. cs THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.14786 of 2010 Date:28th June, 2010