IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2010 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 34442 of 2010(E) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- P. SOMARAJAN, PROPRIETOR, M/S.KAILAS CASHEW EXPORTS, PEZHUKONAM, CHEERANKAVU, KOLLAM - 691 505. BY ADV. SRI.N.RAGHURAJ RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER EMPLOYEE'S PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATIONS, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, KALOOR, KOCHI - 682 017, KERALA. 2. THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEE'S PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATIONS, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, KALOOR, KOCHI - 682 017, KERALA. 3. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SCOPE MINAR, CORE II, 4TH FLOOR, LAXMI NAGAR, NEW DELHI – 110 092. R1 & R2 BY DR.S.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR, SENIOR ADVOCATE, SRI.M.CHANDRA BOSE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/12/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P(C)No.34442 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated 7th December, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner who is the proprietor of a Cashew Processing and Exporting concern filed this writ petition praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 and 2 not to recover the amount determined as per Ext.P1 order till a decision is taken by the third respondent on the application for restoration to be filed by the petitioner before the appellate authority. Earlier, the petitioner has filed an appeal against the order passed under section 7A of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. However, the said appeal was dismissed for default. On 18.11.2010 this Court passed an interim order directing the respondents to maintain the status quo. When this matter is taken up today the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that an application for restoration of Ext.P2 appeal has been filed before the third respondent and it stands posted to 9.12.2010. In the said circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to keep in abeyance all coercive steps taken to recover the amount in terms of Ext.P1 till a decision is taken on the application for restoration submitted before the third respondent. Sd/- C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS // True copy // P.S. to Judge