IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 16593 of 2008 Between: Transmission Corporation of A.P.Limited, rep. by Superintending Engineer, 220 KVSS, TL&SS, Shankarapuram, Kadapa. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Employees Provident Fund Organization, Ministry of Labour Government of India, Rep. by Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner and Officer-in-Charge, Sub-Regional Office, 1/30, R.S.Road, Kadapa. 2 The Enforcement Officer, E.P.F. Organization, Kadapa. 3 State Bank of Hyderabad, Rep. by its Brach Manager, Kadapa Main Brach, Kadapa. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an order, direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declare the action of the Respondents in issuing the letter No. AP/CDR/Circle:21/Damages/AP/43231/ CA/819, dated 4-2-2008 imposing the interest and Penalty of Rs. 20,08,862/- as illegal and arbitrary and consequently set aside the same. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.G.VIDYASAGAR Counsel for the Respondents: Mr.R.N.REDDY (SC FOR EMPLOY'S PF ORG.) The Court made the following : ORDER: This Writ Petition has been ﬁled by the Transmission Corporation of A.P. Limited, Kadapa, rep., by its Superintending Engineer, with a prayer to issue a writ, order, direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in issuing the letter No. AP/CDR/Circle:21/ Damages/ AP/43231/CA/819, dated 04-02-2008, imposing the interest and Penalty of Rs.20,08,862/-, as illegal, and arbitrary. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. 3. When the Writ Petition came up for admission, the learned standing counsel appearing for the Employees’ Provident Fund Organization received notice on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2. 4. The A.P.Transco was formed on 01-02-1999, consequent to the bifurcation of the then A.P. State Electricity Board into A.P.Genco and A.P.Transco. Subsequently it was further unbundled into four distributor companies w.e.f. 01-04-2000. The A.P.Transco vide TOO (GM (1R)-Per) Ms.No.114 dated 23-07-2003 resolved to cover the employees who were recruited on or after 01-02-1999 under the Employees’ Provident Funds Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 ( for short, ‘the Act’) since they are not entitled to the pensionary beneﬁts on par with APSEB employees who came to the hold of A.P.Transco. The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Kadapa issued proceedings dated 04-02-2008 notifying interest under Section 7(c) amounting to Rs.15,46,761 and damages under Section 14(B) of the Act amounting to Rs.4,62,101/- totalling to Rs.20,08,862/- towards interest and damages in respect of the belated payments for the period from December, 1999 to December, 2003. The petitioners addressed a letter dated 13-03-2008 requesting the EPF authorities to withdraw the damages proposed to impose under Section 14(B) of the Act. According to the petitioners, no recoveries were made from the employees recruited on or after 01- 02-1999 and decision was taken to recover contributions from the employees on 23-07-2003 and since then both employers contributions and employees contributions were being paid and therefore action on the part of the respondents 1 & 2 to claim damages under Section 14(B) of the Act was not justified. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in similar circumstances, this Court disposed of W.P.No.13117 of 2008 keeping the orders assailed under suspension directing the petitioner therein to work out the remedy of statutory appeal under the Employees’ Provident Funds Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. 6. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to avail the remedy available under Section 7(1) of the Act subject to the petitioner depositing 50% of the amount demanded with the 1st respondent within four weeks from today. The impugned order passed by the respondents shall be kept in abeyance pending disposal of the appeal or the stay application whichever is earlier. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY,J 31st July, 2008 Note: Furnish C.C. of the order within three days. B/o Tsy To 1 The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner and Officer-in-Charge, Employees Provident Fund Organization, Ministry of Labour Government of India, Sub-Regional Office, 1/30, R.S.Road, Kadapa. 2 The Enforcement Officer, E.P.F. Organization, Kadapa. 3 The Branch Manager, State Bank of Hyderabad, Kadapa Main Brach, Kadapa. 4 2CCs to 5 2CD copies