IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2065 of 2009 M/S BIHAR INSTITUTE OF LAW Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ----------- 2. 11.2.2009 Heard Mr. Shivaji Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Pradhan, learned counsel for Regional Provident Fund Commissioner. At the out set Mr. Pandey would concede that the impugned order is appealable and as such, the petitioner Institution is already contemplating to file an appeal. Mr. Pandey has drawn the attention towards Paragraph 13 of the writ application wherein it has been stated that since the period of filing the appeal is 60 days the petitioner Institution has informed the authorities of Provident Fund Commissioner to await the result of the appeal but the authorities have not acceded to such request; rather they have already taken steps for attachment of the Bank account of the petitioner’s Institution and the Bank operation of such account of Union Bank, Raja Bazar, Patna has already been stopped. Mr. Pradhan, however, is not in a 2 position to make any definite submission as with regard to the aforementioned allegation of seizure of Bank account of the petitioner’s Institution. Normally any coercive step for enforcing the order, which is the subject matter of appeal, can be taken after expiry of the period of appeal, but that can always not be the rule of general application. There can always be compelling circumstancing to give effect to an appeallable order even before completion of the period prescribed for filing appeal and in such case the person aggrieved must not want till last day of the period for filing appeal. Therefore the petitioner instead of filing this writ petition ought to have filed appeal along with an application for stay of the operation of the impugned order which would the subject matter of the appeal at the instance of the assessee. In this case as the order impugned has been passed on 30.12.2008 and communicated on 6.1.2009 and allegedly received on 15th January, 2009, the period of 60 days for filing the appeal 3 is definitely available at least till 1st of March, 2009. However, in view of the fact that certain coercive step has already been taken the petitioner is directed to file an appeal within a period of two weeks from today and till that date, no coercive step will be taken against the petitioner and if any such step has already been taken that must be withdrawn by the authority. As soon as the appeal is filed the petitioner will be at liberty to press his application for stay which would be decided on its own merit. Therefore, the protection given to the petitioner is only for the period of filing of the appeal and the first day of the hearing in the stay matter. The apprehension of Mr. Pradhan that the petitioner may successfully delay the disposal of the stay petition in fact seems to be misconceived, inasmuch as soon as the an appeal will be filed the appellate authority will fix a firm date of hearing on the stay petition which would not be more than a period of one week from the date of filing of the application. With the aforementioned observation 4 and direction, this application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/