PARESH UPADHYAY, J. - (1.) THE petitioner - Establishment has approached this Court, making serious grievance against the Authorities of the Employees Provident Fund Organisation, more particularly against the Officers of its Regional Office at Vapi. In this petition, the following prayers are made. "A) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus and/or a writ of certiorari and /or a writ in the nature of mandamus and/or a writ in the nature of certiorari and/or any appropriate writ, order or direction (i) to hold and declare that action on the part of respondent Nos.1 and 2 in initiating proceedings under Section 8F of coercively recovering the amount dated 06.02.2014 is illegal, arbitrary and be pleased to quash and set aside the said illegal action and further be pleased to direct Respondents No. 3 and 4 to transfer the proceedings under S.7A from the Respondent No.1 to any other RPFC; (ii) to hold and declare that respondent Nos.1 and 2 shall follow the proper procedure before initiating the action under Section 8b to 8G of the Act and reasonable time and opportunity shall be granted to the petitioner before passing order under Section 8B to 8G of the Act; (iii)to direct respondent Nos.1 and 2 to immediately refund amount of Rs.88,17,095/ - with interest at the rate of 12% from the date it has been realized from the petitioner until payment is made to the petitioner; (v) to direct respondent Nos.3 and 4 to lay down proper guidelines in the matter of coercive recovery under Section 8B to 8G of the Act and further be pleased to direct said respondents to take appropriate action against respondent Nos.1 and 2 for taking arbitrary and illegal action against the petitioner; (vi) to hold and declare that direction of learned Tribunal to the extent that amount recovered by the respondent No.1 shall be adjusted against the final order is unjust and to the said extent be pleased to modify the order of the learned Tribunal and be pleased to direct respondent Nos.1 and 2 to refund the amount coercively recovered from the petitioner under order dated 05.02.2014 passed under Section 7A; (vii) to hold and declare that amount of Rs.78,58,241/ - recovered by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 shall be refunded to the petitioner immediately in view of the fact that the same is recovered after the order passed by the learned Tribunal and the same was also not the subject matter before the learned Tribunal; (B) Pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of the petition, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct respondent Nos.1 and 2 to immediately refund amount to Rs.88,17,095 to the petitioner; (C) Pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct respondent Nos.2 and 4 to take appropriate action against the respondent Nos.1 and 2 for taking illegal and arbitrary action against the petitioner and to present the said action report before this Hon'ble Court. (D) Any other and further relief or reliefs which this Hon'ble Court deemed fit, in the interest of justice; may kindly be granted;"
(2.) IT is noted that, the principal defence of the respondent - Authorities was that, during the pendency of this petition, they had also challenged the order passed by the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, at New Delhi in the Appeal filed by the present respondent No.1, being ATA No.126(5) of 2014 dated 13.02.2014, which was the basis to claim relief by the petitioner in this petition. The said petition i.e. the one filed by the present respondent Authorities, was Special Civil Application No.5713 of 2014. It is noted that, the said petition is dismissed by this Court, by a separately pronounced order today.
(3.) BOTH the learned advocates have addressed the Court at length on merits of the matter, including the procedural aspects as prescribed in the Indian Income Tax Act, 1961 as applicable to the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 and the decisions in support and contest thereof. However, this Court finds that, those aspects are not required to be gone into in detail for the reason that, ultimately the matter is remanded by the Tribunal to the concerned Authority. Challenge thereto has also failed as noted above. Under these circumstances, there is no reason not to direct the Authorities to act in accordance with the directions of the Tribunal. This Court also finds that, the Authorities have acted very high -handedly in the present case. If the chronology of events are seen in totality, more particularly the order passed by this Court dated 23.09.2013 recorded in Special Civil Application No.9730 of 2013, the minutes of the proceedings before the Authorities - which are on record, the order passed by the Tribunal dated 13.02.2004 and subsequent actions taken by the Authorities as evident from record, the picture which emerges is that, if not malafide, atleast there is lack of bonafide on the part of the Authorities. Since ultimately the matter is remanded by the Tribunal to the Authorities, further deliberation in that regard is avoided so that it does not prejudice any of the parties, however suffice it to hold that the Authorities of the Government need to look into the affairs of the Offices of the Employees' Provident Fund Department, more particularly at its Regional Office at Surat and Sub - Regional Office at Vapi. This Court had even on earlier occasion expressed the concern about the functioning of these offices, and reference in that regard can be made to; (i) the order passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No.6681 of 2013 dated 22.07.2013 and order of Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in SLP (Civil) CC No.3602 of 2014 dated 07.04.2014, (ii) the common order passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No.10357 and 10628 of 2013 dated 23.07.2013 read with the order of the Division Bench of this Court in Letters Patent Appeal No.936 of 2013 dated 30.07.2013 read with the order of Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in SLP (Civil) No.29883 of 2013 dated 04.10.2013. Under these circumstances, the competent Authorities also need to be asked to keep in view the observations and directions of this Court as contained in the above referred orders, while inquiring into the affairs of these offices.;