IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 10TH DECEMBER 2009 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 31717 of 2009(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BINU JOHN, PROPRIETOR, BABY CASHEW COMPANY,PANAPETY, PORUVAZHY, BHARANIKKAVU, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SMT.A.K.PREETHA SRI.ANIL NARAYANAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION ,SUB REGIONAL OFFICE,OLD MUNICIPAL OFFICE BUILDING, KOLLAM REPRESENTED BY THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER. 2. ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION , SUB REGIONAL OFFICE,OLD MUNICIPAL OFFICE BUILDING, KOLLAM. 3. RECOVERY OFFICER, THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION , SUB REGIONAL OFFICE,OLD MUNICIPAL OFFICE BUILDING, KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.V.V.SURESH,SC,EPF.ORGANISATION FOR R1 TO R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 31717/09. APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE INSPECTION REPORT. P2. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.10.2.09 BY R2. P3. COPY OF THE ANNUAL STATEMENT OF CONTRIBUTIONS. P4. COPY OF THE ORDER BY R2 DTD.22.9.09. P5. COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD.9.10.09 BY R3. P6. COPY OF THE APPEAL DTD.20.11.09. sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 31717 of 2009 ================== Dated this the 10th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P2 order of the 2nd respondent, by which the petitioner has been directed to pay contributions under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act. The petitioner's grievance is that before the petitioner could file appeal against the order passed under Section 7A of the Act, within the period prescribed by the Act, the respondents have initiated coercive proceedings for recovery of the disputed amount. The petitioner would submit that it is unjust to initiate recovery proceedings before the expiry of the period prescribed for filing appeal. 2. At the time of admission, I granted an interim order for a period of one month on condition that the petitioner pays Rs.1 lakhs within that time with a further direction that in the meanwhile, the petitioner shall file an appeal before the Tribunal and produce proof of having filed the same. The petitioner submits that the amount so directed to be paid is being paid today. The petitioner has also produced copy of the appeal filed against the impugned order. The petitioner submits that further recovery proceedings may be directed to be kept in abeyance till the disposal of the appeal. 3. I have heard the learned standing counsel appearing for 2 the Provident Fund Organization also. 4. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it would be improper, if not illegal, for the respondents to initiate recovery proceedings before the expiry of the period prescribed for filing appeal against Ext.P2 order. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: The Tribunal shall dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible. If the petitioner pays the amount of Rs.1 lakh within one week, as undertaken, further coercive proceedings for recovery of the balance amount shall be kept in abeyance. On such payment, the Tribunal shall not insiste on pre-deposit of the amounts demanded and the appeal shall be considered on merits. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge