f 3331J "^THE high court (Special MONDAY ,THE ^ ■TWO THOUSAND OF ANDHRA PRADESH ;; Original Jurisdiction) ■■■ AMARAVATr twenty first day and twenty five present JUSTICE SUBBA OF APRIL the honourable SRI REDDY SATTT ii872OF2025 Between: M/s. Penver Products Pv, Companies Act Ltd. 3 Company registered Companies Act, anpalem Road, Voduru ®P- by its authorized si ’ eged about 70 Chennai, the 1956, under the now under the office at D.No. 285, PunapanVari 2013,having its (P). Chillakur (M), signatory, A Abdul Kareem years. R/o. 36/1 SPSR Nellore DistrictR S/o Abdul Majeed Aminjikarai, Railway Colony. Products Executive Director Pvt. Ltd of M/s. Penver ...PETITIONER^ AND E The State Of Department, 2- The Joint Guntur. Andhra Pradcsi,, Rep. by its Prindpa, Secretariat Buildings VelagapudI, Commissioner Secretary, Labour Guntur District of Labour, Cum Cess Assessment Officer, -RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 22^of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring action of the Respondent No.2 herein in issuing proceedings vide Notice bearing No. C/661/2017, dated 04.03.2025 issued under Section 4 (2) of the Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Cess Act, 1996 received by the Petitioner herein on 28.03.2025 without considering the reply dated 19.12.2024 submitted by the Petitioners herein to the show cause notice issued earlier vide SCN. No. C/661/2017, dated 19.11.2024 and without proper application of mind as being illegal, arbitrary, in Violation of the Principles of Natural Justice contrary to the provisions of Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Cess Act, 1996 and in violation of Articles 14,19,21 of the one Constitution uf India and to consequently set aside the proceedings vide Notice bearing No. C/661/20i7; dated 04.03.2025 issued by the Respondent No. 2. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of proceedings vide Notice bearing No. C/661/2017, dated 04.03.2025 issued by the Respondent No. 2 herein. in the Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRr. N ASHWANI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following: APHC010196582025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] MONDAY ,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 9872/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER Penver Products Pvt Ltd AND ONDENT(S) DCOD ! he State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.N ASHWANI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following ORDER: Heard Sri K.Chaitanya, learned counsel Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 2. representing Sri N.Ashwani and Sri Y.Balaji, learned Impugning the notice vide C/661/2017, dated 04.03.2025 issued by the 2^'^ respondent, the above writ petition is filed. 2. The Cess Assessment Officer & Joint Commissioner of Labour, Guntur issued assessment order vide Procs.No.C/661/2017 dated 30.01.2024 under Section 5 of Cess Act r/w 7 of Cess Rules, 1998 assessing an amount of cess of Rs.19,58,001/- and directed the petitioner to pay the same within 30 days. The order further indicates that an appeal would lie within 90 days before the 3. Commissioner of Labour, A.P., Vijayawada, as per G.O.Ms.No.4, dated 20.01.2009 of the Labour Employment, Training & Factories (Lab-ll) Department. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner filed a statutory appeal along with the condone delay petition. The Appellate authority had not entertained the appeal. Learned Government Pleader would submit that the Appellate authority under the Act had the power to condone the delay. Learned Government Pleader would also point out that except making an averment regarding filing of appeal, the date on which the appeal was filed was not mentioned. Learned counsel would also point out that no paper/document is also filed, jpj reply, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner will file appeal afresh before the Appellate authority. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, since the petitioner intends to file an appeal before the Appellate authority, the writ petition is disposed of, at the admission stage, with the consent of learned counsel on either side giving liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate authority. If the petitioner files an appeal, the Appellate authority - learned Commissioner shall consider the appeal including the delay condone petition filed, if any, strictly as per the Act and Rules made thereunder. No order as to costs. 4. 5. o. 7. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. cAi M RANIESH babu //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER 1^. To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Labour Department, State Of Andhra Pradesh Secretariat Buildings Velagapudi, Messenger] 2. The Joint Commissioner of Labour, Cum Cess Guntur.[by RPAD] 3. One CC to SRI. N ASHWANI KUMAR Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to GP FOR LABOUR ,High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT 5. Three CD Copies Guntur District. [By S^ial Assessment^fficer, HIGH COURT DATED:21/04/2025 ORDER OF o o J»JL 2025 % ,x ^ Gufmnt Secuon ,a WP.No.9872 of 2025 V yV THE WRIT PETITION IS DISPOSED OF AT THE ADMISSION STAGE WITHOUT COSTS .i