WP/24521/2020 of Sri Laxmi Ganapathi Constructions Vs The Singareni Collieries Company Ltd on 31 December 2020

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed lor the follou,ing relief:

". [. ][. ]lo issue a unt, order or direction moreparticularlg one in the nature of Wnt of Mandamus,declaing the action of the respondents in insisting forcomplging uith Clause 37(d) of the Work OrderNo.[REDACTED] dated 10.10.2020 wtth regard toenrolment of the utorkmen and staff of the petittoner asmembers of lhe Coal Mine Prouident lt'und anddeduction of Coal Mine s Prouident ltund from theomounts payable to the petitioner as per the WorkOrder No.[REDACTED], dated 10.10.2020, as arbitraryand iLLegal and furlher declare that the prouistotts of theCoal Mine Proutdent I;urrcl and Miscellaneous ,ProuislonsAct 1948, are not appltcable Lo transport contract andpass such other order or orders may deem fit andproper in the circumstences of the case."

When the matter is taken up, it- is submitted by thelearned counsel for the petitioner that the issue in the presentWril Petition is squarely covered by the common order, dated30.03.2011, passed by this Court in W.P.No.1ltO7 of 2OO9and batch.

Sri J. Srinivasa Rao, learned Standing Counselappearing for respondent Nos. I to 3 and Sri K.L.N.Raghavender Reddy, learncd Standing Counsel for the CoalMines Provident Fund Orga.nization, appearing for respondentNo.4 do not dispute the aforcsaid submission.

The operative [portion ][of the ][aforesaid ][order ][reads ][as]

under:

"Ilence, [the ][Wnt ][Petitions ][are disposed ][of' ][directing]that,(a)the Regional [Commissioner ][or anA ][Officgr]oitnoarZa [bg ][him ][sholt ]first [issue ][a ][notice ][to ][the]Detitioners [-to ][decide whether ][the ][octtuttg]'uni"rtok"n by the petitioners comes tuithin thei.iiiiit-" of [6oal ][hrine. ][It ][shall ][be ][open ][to ][the]t'tititioners [t ]o [submit ][expl ][an al ion ][:](b)in,n" 'one .t.heitt "u"n, coal mine, the [of ][rhe ][atiiuiry ][being ]shall be [declctred ]enrolled[as ]"^ptog""" os members, [subject ][to ][their ][fulfilment,-oJ ][t.ne]or"".riA.a cortditions, [the respondents shall ][a-ssign]iri;;.;"i numbers [and ][issue cards; ][and ][the]tleductions [shatt ][be ][made ][with ][reference ]-to [the]numbers [a.nd ][cards ][so ][issued' ][peiodicalLy;](c)lii """i"", r""n ri^., [no ][dedttctions ][shatt be ][made ]' [but ][if ][it]i" iia thal. the [pelitioners ][are ][lioble' ][at ][a ][lctter]poinl oJ fi.me, [they ][shull ][be ][uru7e'r ][obligation ][to ][paA]the arrears [also;]'(d)tln'" '"ioi iio""t [cleducted ]from [the ][petitioners' ][s-o. ][J.ar ]in [FDI?s ][ancl ][the ][rnanner ][in ][tuhich ][it]U" kept s,hatt be [utilizeci ][shall be decided, depending ][upon]inii"""t""rr. [oJ' ][the exercise ][tutclertaken ][aboue; ][arul'](e)"r,i""""1i",-rti 'siatt of' the Coal Mines l\-ouklent Fund.nsurJ thnt it cloes not deduct anA amount'without [reference to a ][patlicular ][emplogee' ][uho ][is]admitted io the [Prouident ][Fund'"]

In view of [the ][above, ][following ][the ][above ][said ][common]

order and for [the ][reasons recorded ][therein' this ][Writ ][Petition]is also disposed [of ][in ][terms ][thereof']

Miscellaneous [applications' ][if ][any' ][pending ][shall ][stand]closed. [There ][shal1 ][be ][no ][order ][as ][to costs']

SD/. K,AMMAJIASSISTANT [REGIS]ARSECTION [OFFICER]

//TRUE [COPY//]

To,1.The Chairman [and ][tVlanaging ][Director' ][.Singareni Collieries Company ][Ltd ][']si;"#;i [iih;;an, ][KhairataSadl ][Hvderabad]collieries [Company]2.The- General [l\/anager, ][t"J,i#r.i'rtar"Jgement), ]-S:ngareni

2. J.+ffi1it51,::g[Hi6'.":#'gl,'J,',:T,[[i*[tt'*lULv5lt7ol0Jr,,p,rupurri4.m,l"*g*ta*,{+f:'lf*ils},{,v;r:"sl"."itrl'"'*x#'ksh?i:'1!"&o.?l'nlL'n Ad vo cate Io-P [u91]5.a'.% [t [USfl ][il ]

Io-P 5.a'.% 6.7.Effi SS\1gi[:J"ni["&'f [,"Ttr-1gr'S:,',t9a:':',.%*?'ffi ][l"L??YSJio"ntruno]Oroanization [(OPUC)]6.7.Effi SS\1gi[:J"ni["&'f [,"Ttr-1gr'S:,',t9a:':',.%*?'ffi ][l"L??YSJio"ntruno]Oroanization [(OPUC)]If w-o CO CoPies.

with [a ][Copy ][of the ][Common Order ][dated ][30 03 ][2011 ][in ][W ][P ][No'11107 of]Along 2009 and [batch.]

HIGH [COURT]

DATED:31 [11212020]

ORDERlHE [S]14WP.No.24521 [o12020]o05 IAN 2021**..t DISPOSING [OF ][THE WRIT ][PETITION]WITHOUT [COSTS]

s:tJl [crP'][d],1\.,,)\-+

lh

THE HON'9LE fvi? Jr.tST\CE L. NARASTMHA REDD|20112011

COMMON JUDGMENT:

ln this batch of wrjt petitions, common question arises forconsicJeration. Hence, they are disposed of, through a commonjudgment.

The petitioner in W.P.No.t 1107 of 2OO9 is M/s MallikarjunaTransport, and in all othdr writ petitions, it is Sri Srinivasa Transport.The petitioners were assigned the contract by M/s Singareni CollieriesCompany Ltd., (for short'the Company') lor transporting of coal from anlncline to the dumping units, for different periods.The petitioners were assigned the contract by M/s Singareni CollieriesCompany Ltd., (for short'the Company') lor transporting of coal from anlncline to the dumping units, for different periods.

ln every contract, the particulars as to lead, Kilometers, approximatequantity of coal to be transported, the rate per tonne for each of thedestinations, and, ultimately, the total value of the contract arefurnished. lt is also stipulated that, it shall be the obligation of thecontractor to engage machines or trucks, workmen, and to makecontributions under diflerent enactments.

The Company made deductions of different kinds lrom the billspayable to the petitioners. One such deduction is the contribution toCoal lvlines Provident Fund (lor short [,Clr/pF'), ]at 1O.5/6% ol the bill.The petitioners challenge this deduction, on the ground that most ofthe workers engaged by them are on daily or weekly wage basis; noneof them are members ol the ClVpF, and that there is no basis for it. lt is staled that the necessity to make deduction [of ][contribution ][would ][arise']only when an employee [of ]the [petitioners has become ][a ][member ][of the]CMPF, and contributibn must be crediled to [the ][accaunt ][of ][the]employee. The [petitioners ]submit that there [is ]absolutely [no basis ][for]making deduction for such huge amounts, from time to time.

The Company filed a cou nter-affidavit. lt is stated that thededuction is being made, as required under Coal lirlines ProvidentFund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1948 (for short ['the ]Act'), andthe petitioners cannol escape from the statutory liability. lt is alsostated that a Scheme was framed in the year 1948, and the detailsthereof are mentioned. lt is stated that the Commissioner of CoalIt4ines Provident Fund, which is a party in the writ petitions, has todecide such issues, and that the petitioners cannot avoid theirobligation to make contribulion.

Conclusion

Sri V. Ravi Kiran Rao, Iearned counsel lor the petitionersadvanced arguments on behalf of the petitioners. He submits that theactivity undertaken by the petitioners cannot be treated as the one, inthe ['coal ]mine', much less, the workers engaged by them are coveredby the definition under Section 2(b) of the Act. Learned counselsubmits that, in exercise of power unCer thc Act, a scheme was framedby the Central Government, providing for constitution of a fund, lor thebenefit of the coal mines employees, and a Trust, to operate it. Afteradvanced arguments on behalf of the petitioners. He submits that theactivity undertaken by the petitioners cannot be treated as the one, inthe ['coal ]mine', much less, the workers engaged by them are coveredby the definition under Section 2(b) of the Act. Learned counselsubmits that, in exercise of power unCer thc Act, a scheme was framedby the Central Government, providing for constitution of a fund, lor thebenefit of the coal mines employees, and a Trust, to operate it. Afterreferring to the relevant provisions, learned counsel submits that, it isonly when an employee becomes the member of the CMpF, that theobligation would arise, either for the principal employer, i.e. theonly when an employee becomes the member of the CMpF, that theobligation would arise, either for the principal employer, i.e. theCompany, or the Conkactor, to make the contribution. He has alsoplaced reliance upon the judgment of the Supreme Coun to conlendthat a transpon contractor cannot be treated as an employer, much lessplaced reliance upon the judgment of the Supreme Coun to conlendthat a transpon contractor cannot be treated as an employer, much less s t his activity, as that oF a coal mine.

Sri Deepak Baltachargee, learned Standing Counsel for theCoal N,4ines Provident Fund and Sri Nandigama Krishna Bao, learnedStanding Counsel for the Singareni Collieries, on the other hand,submit that the work entrusted to the petitioners is very much anactivity pertaining to coal mine, and that the employees engaged in i1are covered by the provisions of the Act. According to them, once thededuction of the contribution is effected, it would be extended to thepersons for whose ber:3fit it was deducted, at a later point of time.

The Act was brought into existence for the benelit of the workersin the coal mines, ln exercise of power under the Act, the CentralGovernment framed the Coal Mines provident Fund, Family pension,and a Trust, to operate the sarne. The salient leatures of the Schemeare that, the employees, who are engaged in the coal mines, are to bemade members ol the CIVPF, and are issued cards, apart lrom beingassigned numbers. That in turn create obligation on the part ol theemployee and the employer to make contribution to the fund. Thebenefits arising out o{ the tund in favour ol the members are alsoenlisted. The allotment of accounl numbers, issuance of cards, therenewal thereof, etc., are provided for under Clauses 39, 40, 41 and 42of the Scheme. The membership in the fund is coextensive with theemployment in the coal mines.

It is not in dispute that the petitioners are assigned the work oftransporting coal, which is already extracted from the mines.A serious doubt arises, as to whether the activity assigned to them canbe treated as the one, in ['coal ]mine'. The definition of 'coal mine',under Section 2 (b) takes in its fold, vast number of activities enlisted IT

from Clause (i) to [(xiii). ][ln these ][writ ][petitions' ][it is ][not ][necessary ][t0]make a final [pronouncement, ]as [to ][whether the ][transport ][activity ][o{]coal lalls within that delinition.

Even where an activity is referable to a ['coal ][mine'., ][the]necessity lor an employer to make contribution [to ][the ][CMPF ][arises']only when an employee is made a [member ]of [the ][fund. ][The]parameters for an employee \o become a member of the fund arestipulated under the Scheme. Nowhere in the correspondencebetween the parties, it is evident that any effort was made by [the]respondents, lo ascertain these facts. The contributions are beingdeducted, [just ]on the basis of the nu;nber of workers, that aresupposed to be engaged.

It is only when such worker is made the member of the fund, thata meaningful contribution can be made. lf deduction is made, withoutthe worker being the member of the fund, it amounts to an illegal collection, if not undue enrichment on the partof the respondents. The Act does not contemplate the deductionsbeing made, even where, neither account numbers are assigned, normembership cards are issued to the employees.

As and when a responsible officer undefiakes such an exercise,the question, as to whether the activity being undertaken amounts tothat of a coal mine; can also be examined, lt would be premature forthis Court to make any pronouncemenl on such questions.

Hence, the writ petitions are disposed of, directing that,a) the Regional Commissioner or any Ofiicer authorizedby him shall first issue a notice to the petitioners todecide whether the activity undertaken by the I

t8

petitioners comes within the defjnltion of Coal Min6_It shalt be open to the petifioners to submitexplan atio n; in the event of the activity being declared as the one incoal mine, the employees shall be enrolled asmembers, subject to their fulfillment of the prescribedconditions, the respondents shall assign accountnumbers and issue cards; and the deductions shallbe made with reference to the account numbers andcards so issued, periodically; b)

till such time, no deductions shall be made, but if it isheld that the petitioners are Ijable, at a later point oftime, they shall be under obligation to pay the arrearsalso;

c)

d)

the amount deducted from the petitloners, so far, shallbe kept in FDRs and the manner jn which it shall beutilized shall be decided, depending upon theoutcome of the exercise undeftaken above;and the authority of the coal mines provident fund shallensure that it does not deduct any amounl, withoulreference to a particular employee, who is admitted tothe provident fund.

e)

There shall be no order as to costs

L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J.

Dr.30.03-2011.

NeEL.R capy to be matked(B/a)

[,lu}r---