FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s Orders. COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS CA/12388/2010 ASST P F COMMISSIONER VS MAHARASHTRA WITH CA/12399/2010 SHREE SATPUDA VS MAHARASHTRA ... 1. By Civil Application No.12388 of 2010 the Provident Fund Department is seeking leave to withdraw the amount of Rs.2,38,50,113/- along with interest accrued upon it out of total deposited amount of Rs.249.90 lacs in custody with the Registrar of this Court. The amount is claimed towards the provident fund dues of respondent No.2 sugar factory. 2. Civil Application No.12399 of 2010 is moved by the said sugar factory for fixing the matter for final hearing or in the alternative to permit the Provident Fund Department to withdraw the dues of its employees. 3. Reliance has been placed on the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in the matter of Maharashtra State Cooperative Bank Vs. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner [(2009) 10 SCC 123] and the subsequent Division Bench judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No.6826 of 2005 [Maharashtra State Cooperative Bank Vs. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner] dated 7.4.2010, upholding the superior right of the Provident Fund Department to those amounts and permitting the department to withdraw it. 4. Learned Advocate for respondent No.1 State Cooperative Bank has opposed the request for withdrawal. According to him, it is on account of loan provided for by respondent No.1 that the sugar factory could function and earn something. Because of that loan only the employees could get salary and hence the amount of loan must be returned and thereafter only, from the balance amount, provident fund dues can be taken care of. He further contends that for arranging that loan, the sugar bags were also pledged with respondent No.1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s Orders. COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS (2) CA/12388/2010 5. I find the controversy concluded because of the judgment mentioned above. The Division Bench of this Court permitted withdrawal by the Provident Fund Department but then observed that if there are any other prohibitory orders passed by the higher Courts, the same can be withdrawn after the proof, that such amount is due and payable, is produced. The Registrar (J-1) was directed to permit withdrawal in that event. In view of these directions, I find that similar liberty can be given to Provident Fund Department here. One of the contentions of Advocate Shri Dhorde before this Court is that Provident Fund Department has not supplied any details of dues recoverable by said organisation and that anxiety can also be take care of. Accordingly, the Provident Fund Department to produce proof of the amount due and claimed by it and after such documents are produced the Registrar (J) to permit withdrawal of the amount of Rs. Rs.2,38,50,113/- . The withdrawal shall be permitted with advance intimation thereof to respondent No.1 Bank. 6. Both the applications are allowed accordingly. Dt.29.4.2011 (B.P.DHARMADHIKARI,J.) akl