IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN FRIDAY, THE 21ST AUGUST 2009 / 30TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 26157 of 2005(L) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ MANGALAM PUBLICATIONS (INDIA) PVT.LTD., S.H. MOUNT P.O., KOTTAYAM-6, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR. BY ADV. SRI.U.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.P.V.LOHITHAKSHAN SMT.P.VIJAYAMMA SMT.UMA GOPINATH SRI.SANDEEP.E. RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI. 2. THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES POVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, CHALAKUZHI BUILDING CMC COLLEGE ROAD, P.B.NO.36, KOTTAYAM-1. 3. ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, CHALAKUZHI BUILDING CMC COLLEGE ROAD, P.B.NO.36, KOTTAYAM-1. 4. SRI. SUNNY THOMAS, KARUVAKUNNEL HOUSE, AMALAGIRI, P.O. KOTTAYAM-36. 5. SRI. K.M. BABU, KAYATHIL PARAMBIL, KUMARANALLOOR P.O., KOTTAYAM-4. ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R2,3 SMT,T.N.GIRIJA SC P.F. FOR R2,3 SRI.H.B.SHENOY FOR R4 SRI.B.ASHOK SHENOY FOR R4 SRI.C.ANIL KUMAR FOR R5 SMT.A.K.PREETHA FOR R5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) 26157/2005 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Ext.P1 : Copy of the order dated 27.4.2001 passed by the Asst. P.F. Commissioner,Kottayam. Ext.P2 : Copy of the judgment dtd: 6.6.2001 in O.P No.16910 of 2001 Ext.P3 : Copy of the Memorandum of Settlement dated 27.6.2001 Ext.P4 : Copy of the order dated 8.10.2002 passed by the 2nd respondent. Ext.P5 : Copy of the judgment dated 21.1.2003 in O.P No.2156 of 2003 Ext.P6 : Copy of the appeal dated 17.2.2003 without annexures filed by the petitioner before the Ist respondent. Ext.P7 : Copy of the petition and affidavit filed by the petitioner before the Ist respondent. Ext.P8 : Copy of the petition for stay and affidavit filed by the petitioner before the Ist respondent. Ext.P9 : Copy of the order dated 3.3.2003 in ATA No.56(7)/03 passed by the Ist respondent. Ext.P10 : Copy of the statement of account dated 20.3.2003 issued by SBT, Main Br. Kottayam. Ext.P11 : Copy of the statement of account dated 31.8.2003 issued by SBT, Main Br. Kottayam. Ext.P12 : Copy of the judgment dated 11.6.2003 in O.P No.9605 of 2003. Ext.P13 : Copy of the order dated 29.8.2005 No.KR/KTM/5975/ Enf.I(1)/05 passed by the 3rd respondent. Ext.P14 : Copy of the order No.KR.KTM/5975/Enf.I(1)/05 dated 29.8.2005 issued by 3rd respondent. Ext.P15 : Copy of the letter No.KR.KTM/5975/Enf.I(1)/05/7975 dtd.25.8.2005 issued by the 3rd respondent. Ext.P16 : Copy of the letter dtd. 30.8.2005 issued by the Asst. Vice President, UTI Bank Ltd., Kottayam to the 3rd respondent with copy to the petitioner. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS Ext.R4(a) : Copy of news item published in Mangalam daily dated 19.8.2005. // True Copy // PA to Judge. ss V.K. MOHANAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 26157 OF 2005 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 21st day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT The employer whose establishment is covered under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952, preferred this Writ Petition with a prayer to quash Exts.P13, P14 and P15. The second prayer in the Writ Petition is for a direction, directing the first respondent to take up Ext.P7 and P8 and also P6 and to pass orders thereon in accordance with the direction contained in Ext.P12 judgment. There is also a prayer to recall Ext.P13 and P14 issued to the State Bank of Travancore main Branch, Kottayam and UTI Bank Limited, Kottayam and to adjust the amount of Rs. 1,33,063.87/- paid by UTI Bank, Kottayam from the current account of the petitioner to the 3rd respondent against the PF contribution payable by the petitioner for the month of August 2005. w.p.c26157/2005 2 2. The whole legal proceedings originated when Ext.P1 order was passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner SRO, Kottayam U/s.7(A) of the said Act. Against P1, the petitioner has already approached the first respondent by filing Ext.P6 appeal and though stay against Ext.P1 order was sought, the first respondent passed interim order granting stay only subject to certain conditions, as seen from Ext.P9 order. Aggrieved by such conditions in the order, the petitioner approached this Court by filing O.P No.9605/03, which was disposed of by this Court as per Ext.P12 judgment. In Ext.P12 judgment, the operative portion of the judgment read as(para 4):- “The first respondent is directed to take up Exts.P7 and P8 and to pass fresh orders giving an opportunity to the petitioner of being heard within one month from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. Ext.P9 order shall stand set aside. Recovery proceedings in pursuance to Exts.P4 order shall be kept in abeyance for six weeks from today. w.p.c26157/2005 3 There shall be a further direction to the Ist respondent to dispose of Ext.P6 appeal also within three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall be given an opportunity of being heard, before Ext.P6 appeal is disposed of. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this order before the Ist respondent within one month from today. Issue copy of the order to the petitioner”. 3. It is the further case of the petitioner that though Ext.P12 was produced before the first respondent, no further proceedings was taken. It is beyond dispute that for many years, the Ist respondent Tribunal was not functioning. In the meanwhile Ext.P13 and P14 orders were passed. Therefore the petitioner approached this Court challenging Ext.P13 and P14. 4. When the above Writ Petition came up for admission, this Court passed an order on 02/09/2005 staying w.p.c26157/2005 4 the operation of Ext.P13 and P14 orders. Thus neither the appeal pending before the first respondent nor Ext.P13 and P14 orders were proceeded further. From the averments and the materials, it appears that the main grievance of the petitioner is against Ext.P1 and challenging the same, a statutory appeal has already been filed and is pending before the first respondent for consideration for the last several years. In the light of the above facts and circumstances, I am of the view that without going into the merits of the case, the Writ Petition can be disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to dispose of Ext.P6 appeal pending before it. In the result, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to take up Ext.P6 appeal and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible at any rate within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The interim order passed by this Court against Ext.P13 and P14 on 02/09/2005 and made absolute later, will continue till w.p.c26157/2005 5 the disposal of the appeal. The 3rd respondent is directed to retain the amount if any already recovered as mentioned in the 3rd para in the Writ Petition, and the same shall be adjusted on the basis of the final outcome of the appeal. The petitioner is directed to produce a copy of this judgment before the first respondent within 45 days from today. The respondents 4 and 5 can also produce the copy of the judgment before the first respondent. Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. V.K. MOHANAN, JUDGE SS