Supreme Court of India
M/S. LONGIA BIRL COMPANY THROUGH MD. ZIRAZUDDINversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
- Citation
- 1995 INSC 681
- Decided
- 2 November 1995
- Disposal
- Disposed off
Holding
The waiver of the employee's share of the provident fund contribution for the specified period relieves the appellant of that liability, but the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner must be directed to specify the exact amount due and recompute the liability afresh.
Summary
M/s Longia Bir Company, through its MD, appealed to the Supreme Court against a Patna High Court order dismissing its writ petition concerning the computation of liability under the Provident Fund Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The appellant argued that it was not given an opportunity to be heard before the liability and damages were calculated. The Court noted that the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner had, on the appellant’s representation, waived the employee’s share of the provident fund contribution for the period June 1977 to September 1985, thereby relieving the appellant of that liability. However, because the exact amount due was not specified, the Court directed the Commissioner to issue a separate letter indicating the amount payable, after which the appellant must provisionally pay an additional Rs.10 lakh on top of the Rs.8 lakh already paid. The matter was remanded to the Commissioner to recompute the liability afresh, with provisions for refund or further payment as appropriate. The appeal was disposed of with no costs.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant was denied a hearing before the liability under the Provident Fund Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 was computed
- Whether the waiver of the employee's share of provident fund contribution for the period June 1977 to September 1985 is valid and binding
- What procedure should be followed to determine the exact amount of liability and any consequent payment or refund
Subjects
Provident FundWaiverLiability computationEmployee shareSupreme CourtUnion of IndiaPF Miscellaneous Provisions ActRemand
Judgment
M/S. LONGIA RIRl COMPANY THROUGH MD. ZIRAZUDDIN A
v.
UNION OF JNDIA AND ORS.
NOVEMBER 2, 1995
[K. RAMASWAMY AND B.LHANSARIA, .JJ.]
B
Provide/II Fund Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 :
Liability of Provide/II Fund and damages-Compttlation of employee's
share-Waiver by Provident Fund Conunissio11c1~Except aniount not indi- C
cate<f-Directions for indicating the amount and payment of the balance
liabilitylssued.
Jn this appeal against the Patna High Court judgment, the appel-
lant contended that he had not been given any opportunity before comput-
ing the liability of provident fund and the damages under the Provident D
Fund Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.
Disposing of the appeal, this Court
HELD : 1. On a representation from the appellant the Provident
Fund Commissioner waived the payment of the liability of the employee's
E
share of the provident fund contribution from June, 1977 to September
1985 and therefore the appellant was relieved of the liability to deposit the
said an1ount. Since no amount was indicated he is directed to indicate by
separate letter as to what was the amount due and payable by the appellant
for the said period (O\\'ards the pa)'Dlent of en1ployee'~· share of the Provi- F
dent Fund. Alter deduction of the said amount the appellant shall
provisionally 11ay a further sum of Rs. 10 lakhs in addition to the sum of
Rs. 8 lakhs which had already been paid. (744-G-H, 745-A)
2. This case is remanded to the Regional Provident Fund Commis-
sioner to follow the directions issued on May 3, 1993 ·in similar matters G
and compute the liability of the appellant afresh. In case the liability falls
short of the amount already deposited then the appellant shall pay the
shortfall within a period to he specified by the Provident Fund Commis-.
sioner. In case it is found to be in excess, the Regional Provident Fund
Commissioner would refund the amount. (745-E) H
743
•
744 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995] SUPP. 4S.C.R.
A CIVIL APPELLANT JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 10273 of
1995.
From the .Judgment and Order dated 1.11.89 of the Patna High Court
in C.W..l.C. No. 1904 of 1989.
B Pramod Swarup for the Appellant.
Hemant Sharma and C.V.S. Rao for the Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
C Leave granted.
This appeal by special leave arises from the order dated November
1, 1989 of the Division Bench of the Patna High Court in C.W.J.C. No.
1904 of 1989, dismissing the writ petition of the appellant. Learned counsel
for the appellant contended that the appellant had not been given any
D opportunity before computing the liability of provident fund and the
damages under the Provident Fund Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. On
a representation made by the appellant the Regional Provident Fund
Commissioner, Bihar at Patna in his letter dated 21st September, 1993
stated thus :
E
"Please refer to your representation dated 27.8.93 on the subject
cited above.
The point raised by you in the aforesaid petition is required to be
examined in detail vis-a-vis statutory provisions, pending decision
F in the matter, you are hereby comn1unicatcd the decision the extent
that the payment of employees share of P.F. contribution is waived
for the period 6n7 to 9/85 in accordance with the existing direc-
tions. It is, however, made clear that as regards other points, the
petition will remain as before."
G In view of the waiver of the payment of the liability of the employee's
share of the provident fund contribution for the period commencing from
.June 1977 to September 1985, the appellant is relieved of the liability to
deposit the said amount. The amount due on that account was not indi-
cated in the letter. Therefore, the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner
H is directed to indicate by separate letter as to what was the amount due
•
LONGIA BIR! CO. v. U.0.1. 745
and payable by the appellant for the said period towards the payment of A
the employee's share of the providCnt fund. After deduction of the said
amount, the appellant shall provisionally pay a further sum of Rs. 10 lakhs
in addition to the sum of Rs. 8 lakhs which had already been paid. This
Court on May 3, 1993 passed the following order in similar matters :
'The SLPs are dismissed. It is open for the petitioner to collect B
the names of the Bidi Workers who work for them through their
contractor and furnish the names of all the workers to the Provi-
dent Fund Commissioner. The Provident Fund Commissioner
thereafter will verify these names and calculated the liability of the
petitioner on the basis of such verification. If any excess amount c
is found due from the petitioner, the Provident Fund Commis-
sioner will recover such an1ount from the petitioner, on the other
hand, if any amount is found due to the petitioner, the Provident
Fund Commissioner will refund the same. The petitioner to furnish
names of the workers, as above within six months from today."
D
In this view of the matter, the case is remanded to the Regional
Provident Fund Commissioner to follow the above directions and compute
the liability of the appellant afresh. In case the liability falls short of the
amount already deposited then the appellant shall pay the shortfall within
a period to be specified by the Provident Fund Commc"ioner. In case it is
E
found to be in exce~s, the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner would
refund the amount.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly. No costs.
G.N. Appeal disposed.
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "Provident Fund"Sign in to search