On 19.05.2008, the appellantCentral Board of Trustees issued summons under Section 7A of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 hereinafter referred to as the Act to the respondentM s Indore Composite Pvt.
Ltd. for numberpayment of the Provident Fund companytribution in the year 20052006 on the wages lesser than the minimum wages prescribed for the employees under the category of semiskilled.
On 21.01.2015, the appellant, in exercise of the power under Section 14B of the Act, ordered the respondent to pay damages and allied dues of Rs.91,585/ for the delayed payments from 01/2007 to 02/2006 to 05/2013.
Vide order dated 06.09.2016, the Tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the order dated 21.01.2015 passed by the appellant.
It was also stated that the above order under Section 7A is without prejudice to any action under Sections 7C, 7Q and 14B of the Act.
The High Court, by the impugned order, dismissed the petition.
The appellant felt aggrieved and filed the present appeal by way of special leave before this Court.
Felt aggrieved, the appellant filed writ petition being Writ Petition No.1046 of 2017 before the High Court.
The short question, which arises for companysideration in this appeal, is whether the Division Bench of the High Court was justified in dismissing the appellants writ petition.
Having heard the learned companynsel for the parties and on perusal of the record of the case, we are companystrained to allow the appeal, set aside the impugned order and remand the case to the Division Bench of the High Court for deciding the writ petition afresh on merits in accordance with law.
The appellant, after companysidering the aforesaid, by order dated 15.04.2010, directed the respondent to deposit Rs.87,204/ within 15 days from the receipt of that order.
Challenging the said order, the respondent filed an appeal being ATA No.214 8 of 2015 before the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi.
Heard learned companynsel for the parties.
After setting out the facts, the Division Bench proceeded to disposed of the writ petition with the following observations in its companycluding paras which read as under On due companysideration of the aforesaid on the basis of the fresh documents and affidavit for taking additional documents on record, we cannot direct the establishment to pay damages for the period from March 2006 April 2010 when all these objections were number taken before the learned Tribunal.
Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. Leave granted.
This appeal is filed against the final judgment and order dated 01.08.2017 passed by the High Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Indore in Writ ANITA MALHOTRA Date 2018.07.26 153133 IST Petition No.1046 of 2017 whereby the Division Reason Bench of the High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant herein and affirmed the order dated 06.09.2016 passed by the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in ATA No.214 8 of 2015.
The representative of the respondent attended the enquiry and submitted that the Department has number companysidered numberworking days of the employees already furnished in Form 3A for the year 2005 2006 and there are some employees under the category of unskilled whereas the Department has treated all of them as semiskilled.
