IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2008 / 6TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 10021 of 2008(R) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ TALIPARAMBA CO-OPERATIVE HOSPITAL SOCIETY LTD, NO.C.1468, KARIMBAM POST, TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR DT, REP BY IT'S HON.SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.P.NARAYANAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. ASST. PROVIDENT FUND COMMISIONER EMPLOYEES' PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION,SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, V.K.COMPLEX FORT ROAD, KANNUR. 2. STATE OF KERALA REP BY THE SECRETARYTO GOVT. DEPT OF CO-OPERATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV.R.SIDHIR, SC. G.P. SHRI.A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 10021 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 26th day of March, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a co-operative society running a hospital. They are aggrieved by the proceedings initiated by the 1st respondent for assessing contributions under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (“the Act” for short). The contention of the petitioner is that since the petitioner's hospital is covered under the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Employees Self Financing Pension Scheme, 1994, and in view of Section 16 of the Act, they are not liable to be covered under the Act. I am not inclined to consider the matter on merits in this writ petition since the 1st respondent has not passed any order under Section 7A of the Act directing coverage of the petitioner's hospital under the Act. It is for the petitioner to raise the contention that the petitioner's hospital is not liable to be covered under the Act, in which event, it is incumbent on the 1st respondent to consider the same and pass an order as contemplated under Section 7A(1)(a) of the Act 2 deciding as to whether the petitioner's hospital is liable to be covered under the Act. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent that if the petitioner raises the question of coverage of the hospital under the Act, the same would be decided as a preliminary issue before proceeding further. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge