IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.82 of 2006 1. BIHAR STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, BANKIPUR BRANCH, PATNA THROUGH ITS BRANCH MANAGER. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, BIHAR STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK BANKIPUR BRANCH, ASHOK RAJ PATH, PATNA. … PETITIONERS. Versus 1. THE REGIONALPROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER-II (BIHAR) REGIONAL OFFICE, ‘R’ BLOCK, ROAD NO.6, PATNA. 2. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, DEPOSIT ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT, SOUTH GANDHI MAIDAN, PATNA-800001. 3. BIHAR RAJYA BEEJ NIGAM LTD AGRICULTURAL FORUM MITHAPUR, PATNA-800001 THROUGH MANAGING DIRECTOR. … RESPONDENTS. For the Petitioner: Mr. K.K. Sinha, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Ram Shankar Pradhan, Sr. Advocate. ----------- 15. 19.01.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the counsel for the Provident Fund Commissioner. 2. Petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 25.11.2005/30.11.2005, Annexure-4 whereunder a sum of Rs. 27,50,329.70 has been directed to be remitted within three days from the account of the petitioners to the account of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II, Bihar as the said amount is the dues of Bihar State Seeds Corporation a defaulter within the meaning of Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. Petitioners are also aggrieved by the direction of the Reserve Bank of India dated 9.12.2005, Annexure-5 blocking the aforesaid amount from the account of the petitioners for payment to the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II, Bihar. Petitioners have challenged the aforesaid two orders on the ground that notice dated 21.2.2005 2 to remit the aforesaid amount from the account of Bihar State Seeds Corporation to the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II, Bihar was neither served on the Branch Manager nor put up before him and he could not pass orders for remittance of the amount in favour of Commissioner. Subsequent notice dated 20.7.2005 was received by the petitioner on 27.7.2005 in response thereto the balance amount as available in the account of the Seeds Corporation Rs. 1,26,580.00 was promptly remitted to the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II, Bihar. Aforesaid stand taken by the petitioners has been rejected by the authorities of the Provident Fund Commissioner under the impugned order as from the show-cause filed by the petitioners before the authorities of the Provident Fund Commissioner dated 16.11.2005, Annexure-3 itself indicates that petitioners could not remit the amount as the notice directing them to remit the amount was neither duly served upon the Branch Manager nor it was put up before him. The show-cause dated 16.11.2005, Annexure-3 does not assert that notice dated 22.12.2004 and 21.2.2005 was not received in the Branch. In the circumstances, there is no difficulty for me to conclude that notice dated 22.12.2004 and 21.2.2005 was received in the Branch but thereafter the functionary of the Branch who received the notice did not put up before the Branch Manager and for such lapse on the part of the functionary of the Branch, the Branch has to suffer. Had the 3 functionary of the Branch placed the notice dated 22.12.2004 and 21.2.2005 before the petitioner no.2 the amount available to the credit of the Bihar State Seeds Corporation in their account with the petitioners must have been remitted to the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner so as to satisfy the part of the demand raised by the Commissioner against the Corporation. The Branch having not taken steps in the light of the notice dated 22.12.2004 and 21.2.2005, I do not see any merit in the writ petition, which is, accordingly, dismissed. Reliance placed by the counsel for the petitioners over the judgment of this Court in the case of Ganpati Jha vs. The State of Bihar reported in 2011(1) PLJR 156 is misplaced as in the case in hand notice has been served on the functionary of the Branch who is none else than the agent of the petitioners. Ibrar/- ( V.N. Sinha, J.)