Mr. Virender Singh, J. - (1.) Shri Pankaj Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard on the question of admission. This writ petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution has been filed by the Employee's Provident Fund Organization against the order dated 26/07/2016, passed by the Employees' Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi by which appeal filed by the respondents under Sec. 7-I of the Employees' Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952( in short ... "the Act") has been allowed.
(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the respondent/establishment is a Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and operation of the establishment is closed since 2007, on account of acute shortage of working capital. Due to recession in the market, respondent/establishment turned into a sick unit. An application under Sec. 15(1) of the Sic Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act 1985 before the Board of Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) was registered in the year 1989 and lastly respondent/establishment was declared as sick industrial company. Due to late payment of funds contribution for the period from March 1999, to Nov. 2014, the petitioner has imposed damages and interest by order dated 16/09/2015. The respondent challenged the said order by filing appeal on the ground that no adjudication has been made as to ground for imposing maximum damages under Sec. 14-B of the Act. The proceedings under Sec. 14-B of the Act is an adjudicatory one, imposition of maximum penalty cannot be mandatory.
(3.) To support the aforesaid ground, he cited a Full Bench decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Roma Henny Security Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Central Board of Trustees, EPF Organisation through Assistant PF Commissioner, Delhi (North) (2013) 1 LLJ 29 Del., upholding the law laid down by the Division Bench of Delhi in System & Stamping & Anr. Vs. Employees' Provident Appellate Tribunal & Ors. (2008) 2 LLJ 939.;