IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5367 of 2008 1. M/S Shree Jan Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd., Deep Magar Nalanda, Biharsharif, through its proprietor Mohan Pandey. 2. Mohan Pandey, son of Late Shyam Sundar Pandey, Director of M/S Shree Jan Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd., Deep Magar Nalanda, Biharsharif, Versus 1. The Union Of India, through the Regional Provident Commissioner, Bihar, Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Regional Office, Bhanishyanidhi Bhawan, ‘R’ Block, Road nO. 6, Patna-800001. 2. The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Bihar, Regional Office of the Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Bihar, ‘R’ Block, Patna For the Petitioners :M/s Purushottam Kumar Jha & Sanjay Kumar, Advocates For the Union : Mr. Ratnakar Pandey, Advocate 02/ 06.12.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the Counsel for the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner. Petitioner- Establishment is aggrieved by the order dated 16.10.2007, Anneuxre-7, passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, whereunder the liabilities of the petitioner-Establishment under the Employees’ Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 has been enhanced. Against the order dated 16.10.2007, Annexure-7, petitioner filed appeal before the Appellate Authority, the memo of appeal is dated 20/26.11.2007 and is contained in Annexure-9 to this application. - 2 - Counsel for the petitioners states that during the pendency of the aforesaid appeal, the bank account of the petitioner-Establishment was attached by the Assistant Commissioner under attachment order dated 6.12.2007, Annexure-1. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the appeal filed by the petitioners could not be entertained by the Appellate Authority for want of quorum and such statement is made in paragraph 24 of the writ petition. It is also submitted that for want of quorum, the appeal could not be considered and disposed of and the attachment order dated 6.12.2007, Annexure-1 ought not to have been issued in the meanwhile. Counsel for the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Sri Ratnakar Pandey states that at the time when the appeal was filed, quorum was not complete, but after appointment of the members in the Tribunal, quorum is now available and the petitioners should be well advised to pursue the appeal with prayer to stay the attachment order before the Appellate Authority. In view of the statement made at the Bar, although such statement is not made in the counter affidavit filed by - 3 - Sri G.V. Shelar, Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Patna, I dispose of the writ petition directing the petitioners to assail the attachment order before the Appellate Authority during the hearing of the appeal, Annexure-9. In case, statement made by Sri Ratnakar Pandey about the functioning of the Appellate Authority is not correct, petitioner is at liberty to approach this Court. Arjun/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)