IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 11TH JANUARY 2010 / 21TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 818 of 2010(B) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- B. MOHANACHANDRAN NAIR, PROPRIETOR, M/S. PRASANTHI CASHEW COMPANY, ULIYAKOVIL, KOLLAM. BY ADVS. SMT.A.K.PREETHA, MR.ANIL NARAYANAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CORE-2, 4TH FLOOR, SCOPE MINAR, LAXMI NAGAR, NEW DELHI - 1100092. 2. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, OLD MUNICIPAL OFFICE BUILDING, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER. 3. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER-II, THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, OLD MUNICIPAL OFFICE BUILDING, KOLLAM. R1 TO R3 BY MR. V.V. SURESH, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/01/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 818 OF 2010 -------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the proprietor of a cashew factory. Aggrieved by the order passed by the third respondent under section 7B of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, the petitioner has filed Ext.P1 appeal dated 10.8.2009 before the Employees Provident Funds Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. Along with the said appeal, the petitioner has also filed applications for waiver of deposit as required under Section 7O of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 and for stay of operation of the order impugned in the appeal. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks expeditious disposal of Ext.P1 appeal and to stay further proceedings pursuant to the order impugned in the appeal, till its disposal. 2. The petitioner submits that Ext.P1 appeal is filed within time and that if before the Appellate Tribunal considers the same and passes orders thereon, the order impugned in the appeal is implemented and steps taken to recover the amount of contribution determined by the third respondent, the appellate remedy will be W.P.(C) No. 818/2010 2 rendered illusory and meaningless. 3. Sri. V.V.Suresh, the learned standing counsel appearing for the Employees Provident organisation submits that under Section 7O of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 read with rule 7 of the Employees Provident Funds Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1997, the petitioner has to deposit the amount covered by the order impugned in the appeal unless the Appellate Tribunal dispenses with such deposit. He submits that as the Appellate Tribunal is yet to pass orders waiving pre-deposit and has not entertained the appeal, the petitioner cannot seek stay of operation of the order impugned in the appeal merely on the ground that he has invoked the appellate remedy available to him. 4. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar by the learned counsel appearing on either side. Under Section 7I of the Act, an appeal lies from an order passed under Section 7A/7B of the Act to the Employees Provident Funds Appellate Tribunal. Under Section 7O of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 read with rule 7 of the Employees Provident W.P.(C) No. 818/2010 3 Funds Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1997 the appeal filed by the petitioner will not be entertained by the Tribunal unless he has deposited 75% of the amount determined under Section 7A of the Act. The Tribunal is however empowered to waive or reduce the amount to be deposited under Section 7O of the Act. 5. In the instant case, the liability imposed on the petitioner by the order impugned in the appeal is the sum of Rs.94,546.80/-. In my opinion as the petitioner has invoked the appellate remedy available to him, further proceedings pursuant to the order impugned in Ext.P1 appeal can be stayed till the Appellate Tribunal passes orders in the appeal in the event of the petitioner remitting the sum of Rs.30,000/- within one month from today. I accordingly dispose of the writ petition with the direction that in the event of the petitioner depositing the sum of Rs.30,000/- within one month from today, further proceedings pursuant to the order impugned by the petitioner in Ext.P1 appeal filed and pending before the Employees Provident Funds Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi shall stand stayed and the Appellate Tribunal shall entertain and dispose of the appeal on the merits after notice to and affording the petitioner W.P.(C) No. 818/2010 4 a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The Tribunal shall in the event of the petitioner depositing the sum of Rs.30,000/- waive the deposit of the balance amount by treating the deposit made pursuant to this order as pre-deposit. The contentions of both sides on the merits are kept open. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE vps