THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.12407 of 2011 Date:27.04.2011 Between: M/s Suparnaa Transporters & Lifters, Karimnagar ..... Petitioner AND The Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Hyderabad and others .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri V. Ravi Kiran Rrao Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 4: Sri T.S.Pattabhi Rama Rao for Sri Nandigama Krishna Rao Counsel for Respondent No.5: Sri Deepak Bhattacharjee The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “…to issue a Writ, Order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents 1 to 4 in so far as insisting for payment of Employees Coal Mines Provident Fund by the petitioner by way of Contractor’s contribution pursuant to Clause 10 in the work Order No.7600003299 dated 25.06.2010 and the agreement bond dated 14.09.2010 and the steps taken by the respondent company for deducting the same from out of the amounts payable to the petitioner towards transportation charges in accordance with the above said work order though the provisions of the Coal Mines Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1948 are not applicable to Transport Contractor who simply undertake to transport the coal from one place to another place as per the work by duly declaring the Clause 10 of the work Order No.7600003299 dated 25.06.2010 and the agreement bond dated 14.09.2010 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the Coal Mines Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1948 and the rules made there under and pass such further or orders…” At the hearing, Sri V.Ravi Kiran Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that in common judgment dated 30.03.2011 in W.P.No.11107 of 2009 and batch, this Court disposed of the writ petitions, which are identical to the present writ petition with the following directions: (a) the Regional Commissioner or any Officer authorized by him shall first issue a notice to the petitioners to decide whether the activity undertaken by the petitioners comes within the definition of Coal Mine. It shall be open to the petitioners to submit explanation. (b) in the event of the activity being declared as the one in coal mine, the employees shall be enrolled as members, subject to their fulfilment of the prescribed conditions, the respondents shall assign account numbers and issue cards; and the deductions shall be made with reference to the account numbers and cards so issued, periodically; (c) till such time, no deductions shall be made, but if it is held that the petitioners are liable, at a later point of time, they shall be under obligation to pay the arrears also; (d) the amount deducted from the petitioners, so far, shall be kept in FDRs and the manner in which it shall be utilized shall be decided, depending upon the outcome of the exercise undertaken above; and (e) the authority of the coal mines provident fund shall ensure that it does not deduct any amount, without reference to a particular employee, who is admitted to the provident fund. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that as this writ petition is similar to those decided by this Court by the above noted judgment, the same relief may be granted in this writ petition. Sri T.S.Pattabhi Rama Rao, learned counsel representing Sri Nandigama Krishna Rao, learned standing counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Sri Deepak Bhattacharjee, learned standing counsel representing respondent No.5 have conceded to the above position. Having regard to the above, this Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the above noted judgment with the direction that the directions granted in the said batch of writ petitions and referred to above shall form part of this order. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.15113 of 2011 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 27th April, 2011 Note: Issue CC in one week. (B/o) GHN