WP (C) No.1602/2011 Page 1 UNREPORTABLE * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP (C) No.1602/2011 Date of Decision: March 11, 2011 MAHAVIR PLANTATIONS PVT LTD …… Petitioner through Mr. C.N.Sreekumar, Advocate with Mr. S.S.Pandey, Advocate versus THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER & ANR ..... Respondents through Mr. R.C.Chawla, Advocate with Mr. Sri Ram Kamal, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE REKHA SHARMA 1. Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the „Digest‟? No REKHA SHARMA, J. (ORAL) This writ-petition is directed against the order of the Employees‟ Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, dated September 13, 2010 dismissing an appeal filed before it against an order passed under Section 7Q of the Employees‟ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter called the “Act”) on the ground that an order passed under the said Section is not an appealable order. It is not in dispute that an order under Section 7A of the Act determining the liability of the petitioner was passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner on November 21, 2007 and in the same order, the petitioner was held liable to pay simple interest @ 12% in terms of Section 7Q of the Act. It is also not in dispute that the WP (C) No.1602/2011 Page 2 petitioner raised no challenge to the said order. As a matter of fact, the order dated November 21, 2007 came to be passed after the petitioner inspite of opportunities given failed to appear before the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner. The petitioner did pay the amount due from it as determined under Section 7A of the Act, but did not pay the interest levied under Section 7Q of the Act. Hence, a further order dated June 03, 2010 was passed against it by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, R.O. Coimbatore levying interest to the tune of ` 27,92,681.55P. It was against this order that the petitioner had preferred an appeal before the Employees‟ Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal. It is provided in Section 7Q of the Act that, “the employer shall be liable to pay simple interest at the rate of twelve per cent per annum or at such higher rate as may be specified in the Scheme on any amount due from him under this Act from the date on which the amount has become so due till the date of its actual payment.” An employer under this Section becomes liable to pay interest as a consequence of his failure to pay any amount due from him under the Act from the date it became due till its actual payment. Once the liability has been determined, the interest thereon has to follow. And this is what has been done in the present case. The Section leaves no scope for interference. The Tribunal is justified in holding that the order passed under Section 7Q of the Act is not an appealable order. There is no merit in the writ-petition. The same is dismissed. REKHA SHARMA, J. MARCH 11, 2011 ka