INLAND WATERWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA Vs. EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Provident Fund Authority Affidavit-of-service, filed in Court today, is taken on record.

(2.) Through this writ petition the employer petitioner has challenged the order dated September 26, 2024 annexure P-6 at page 117 to the writ petition. By virtue of this order the provident fund authority has claimed interest passed under Sec. 7Q of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 on account of delayed deposit. This order passed under Sec. 7Q of the 1952 Act is not an appealable one under Sec. 7I of the Act. By another order the dated i.e. September 26, 2024 annexure P-5 at page 115 to the writ petition, the provident fund authority has assessed damages in exercise of its power under Sec. 14B of the 1952 Act. Being aggrieved thereby the petitioner employer has already preferred a statutory appeal and the same is pending. Mr. Malay Dhar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner specifically submits that the said order at page 115 to the writ petition is not the subject matter of this writ petition and the petitioner shall pursue the pending statutory appeal.

(3.) Referring to annexure P-7 at page 118 to the writ petition which is a part of annexure P-4, Mr. Malay Dhar, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the said representation has already been submitted before the respondent no. 2. After the impugned order was passed on September 26, 2024 at page 117 to the writ petition, the petitioner submits that due to a bona fide mistake on the part of one of its employees while putting the entry in the Electronic Challan-cum-Return (ECR), the date of disbursal of salary to the employees was allegedly wrongly shown, which led the authority to pass the impugned order.