- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11002 WP No. 61287 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT PETITION NO. 61287 OF 2011 (L-PF) BETWEEN: KANAKDAS KURI SANGOPAN MATTU UNNEY UTPADAK SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT, BY ITS CHAIRMEN, SRI. RAMLING RAYAPPA ANGOLKAR, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, AT/POST: SHINDOLI, TQ & DIST: BELGAUM. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SUNIL S. DESAI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, REPRESENTED BY ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, (ENFORCEMENT) HUBLI. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. P.V. GUNJAL, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS LEADING TO THE PASSING OF THE ORDER DATED 23.12.2010 (ANNEXURE-E) PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND ALSO THE ORDER DATED 08.02.2006 (ANNEXURE-A) PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT; ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER BEARING NO.MN/HBL/9596/ENF/2005/7030/06 DATED 08.02.2006 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ORDER DATED 23.12.2010 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ATA NO.531/6/2005 VIDE ANNEXURE-E, AS ILLEGAL AND VOID AND ETC. YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Location: HIGHCOURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11002 WP No. 61287 of 2011 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner calling in question the order dated 23.12.2010 passed in A.T.A.No.531/6/2005 by the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal (Ministry of Labour and Employment)1, Bangalore (Annexure-E to the writ petition) and the order issued on 20.12.2005 (which is also bearing No.MN/HBL/9596/ENF/2005/7030/06 dated 08.02.2006) passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner2 under Section 7A of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 19523 (Annexure-A to the writ petition). 2. The primary contention urged on behalf of the petitioner is that in the assessment done by the Commissioner, based on which the order dated 20.12.2005 is passed, the 1 Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Appellate Tribunal’ 2 Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Commissioner’ 3 Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11002 WP No. 61287 of 2011 calculation of provident fund was made in respect of 16 employees, whereas 10 of these employees had already left the service of the petitioner on 31.08.2001. It is also contended that the Provident Fund Authorities had already settled the provident fund claims in respect of the said 10 employees who had left the service of the petitioner on 31.08.2001. Reliance is placed on the communication bearing No.KN/HBL/ADM/2007/309 dated 04.07.2007 (Annexure-C to the writ petition), furnished by the Employees Provident Fund Organisation, which was provided in response to an application made under the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 20054. It is also contended that, the Appellate Tribunal, in its order dated 23.12.2010, has recorded a finding that no documents have been filed to show that 10 employees left the organization, whereas the requisite information is furnished as Annexure-C in the present writ petition. 3. Although it is the vehement contention of the learned counsel for the respondent that no material was produced before the Appellate Tribunal to demonstrate that 10 employees had left the petitioner, and that documents in this regard have been 4 Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act, 2005’ - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11002 WP No. 61287 of 2011 furnished only in the present writ petition, having regard to the admitted position that 10 employees left the service of the petitioner on 31.08.2001, it is just and proper that the proceedings initiated by the Commissioner under Section 7A of the Act, 1952, be redone by taking into account the fact that 10 employees had left the service of the petitioner on 31.08.2001. 4. In view of the aforementioned discussion the following: ORDER i) The writ petition is allowed; ii) The order dated 23.12.2010 passed in A.T.A.No.531/6/2005 by the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal (Ministry of Labour and Employment), Bangalore, is set aside; iii) The order dated 20.12.2005 (which also bearing No.MN/HBL/9596/ENF/2005/7030/06 dated 08.02.2006) passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner under Section 7A of the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11002 WP No. 61287 of 2011 Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, is set aside; iv) The petitioner shall appear before the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner on 25.09.2025 without the requirement of any further notice being issued in this regard; v) The petitioner shall file its response in the proceedings initiated under Section 7A of the Act by placing the relevant material on record, which demonstrates the fact that 10 employees had left the service of the petitioner as has been noticed in this order; vi) Consequent to the response of the petitioner, the Commissioner shall redo the assessment in terms of Section 7A of the Act by also considering the fact that 10 employees left the service of the petitioner on 31.08.2001; vii) The Commissioner shall complete the said proceedings within a limit of 30 days from the date of appearance of the petitioner; - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11002 WP No. 61287 of 2011 viii) All contentions of the parties are left open. Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE PMP CT-MCK/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9