http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: M/S. LONGIA BIRI COMPANYTHROUGH MD. ZIRAZUDDIN

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT02/11/1995

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. HANSARIA B.L. (J)

CITATION:  1995 SCALE  (6)432

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      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 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:      "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  in the matter, you are      hereby  communicated  the  decision  the      extent that  the  payment  of  employees      share of P.F. contribution is waived for      the period  6/77 to  9/85 in  accordance      with the  existing  directions.  It  is,      however,  made  clear  that  as  regards      other points,  the petition  will remain      as before."      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 indicated in  the letter.  Therefore, the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner is directed to indicate by separate letter as to  what was  the amount due and payable by the appellant

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

for the  said period  towards the  payment of the employee’s share of  the provident  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  the names of      the  Bidi  Workers  who  work  for  them      through their  contractors  and  furnish      the names  of all  the  workers  to  the      Provident   Fund    Commissioner.    The      Provident Fund  Commissioner  thereafter      will verify  these names  and  calculate      the liability  of the  petitioner on the      basis  of   such  verification.  If  any      excess amount  is  found  due  from  the      petitioner,    the     Provident    Fund      Commissioner will  recover  such  amount      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."      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 Commissioner. In  case it  is found  to be  in  excess,  the Regional  Provident   Fund  Commissioner  would  refund  the amount.      The appeal is disposed of accordingly. No costs.