Manjula Chellur, C.J.
Appellant herein is Employees Provident Fund Organisation, who is aggrieved by judgment of learned Single Judge. Respondent company was the writ petitioner. They approached learned Single Judge contending that they were in severe financial trouble and liabilities were more than the paid up share capital. All these happened on account of change of management in the year 2007. In spite of remittance of huge amounts by the present management, trouble has not come to an end. According to them, demand by appellant authorities a huge sum of Rs.44,64,819/- towards contribution, damages and interest is without following the procedure and principles of natural justice, therefore, an occasion arose for them to challenge the judgment.
2. By reading of the judgment of learned Single Judge, there is no positive and specific direction that quantum of penalty must be reduced to 30% of the amount levied as damages. As a matter of fact, the very claim of respondent/writ petitioner company was to give them an opportunity to put forward their case, so that there could be re-calculation or re-assessment of penalty and other amounts to be paid by them. Learned Single Judge only observed that in several cases said Court had reduced quantum of penalty to 30% of the amount. If learned Judge intended to reduce penalty to 30%, there could have been similar direction. On the other hand, the direction is to remit the matter to assessing authority for re-calculation. It would only mean that while giving opportunity to respondent Company, assessing authority must make re-calculation taking into consideration financial trouble and other circumstances in which the employer is placed.
In the light of above observations, we are of the opinion, nothing remains for us to intervene in the judgment of learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed.
MANJULA CHELLUR, CHIEF JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE
vgs25.6.14