IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 2436 of 2009 Between: Gurazala Primary Agriculture Co-op. Credit Society Ltd., (No.1846) rep. by its Secretary, Gurazala Village & Mandal, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Regional Commissioner-II / Authorised Officer, The Employees' Provident fund Organisation, Regional Office, Bhavishyanidhi Bhavan, 3rd lane, Krishna Nagar, Guntur. 2 The Recovery Officer, The Employees' Provident fund Organisation, Regional Office, Bhavishyanidhi Bhavan, 3rd lane, Krishna Nagar, Guntur. 3 P. Narayana S/o. Mangaiah Charlagudipadu Village, Gurazala Mandal, Guntur District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue writ or order more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the orders in Ref.No.AP/RO/GNT.33967/RECY/GNT/2008/540/1590, dated 29.12.2008 issued by the 2nd respondent, as illegal, contrary to law, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice, and to ass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.VENKATESWARLU POSANI Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.R.N.REDDY (SC FOR EMPLOY'S PF ORG.) The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 2436 OF 2009 ORDER: 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner questions the prohibitory order, dated 29-12- 2008 issued by the Recovery Officer, Employees Provident Fund Organization-2nd Respondent. 3. Indisputably, an order under Section 7A of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 ( herein after referred to as ‘the Act’) came to be passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner. Unless, the order passed under Section 7-A of the Act is questioned, the petitioner cannot challenge the prohibitory order impugned in the writ petition. 4. It is the contention of the petitioner that the petitioner is not aware of the order passed under Section 7 A of the Act against Madugula Primary Agriculture Co-op. Credit Society Limited which came to be merged with the petitioner society w.e.f. 25-7-2005. Once Madugula Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society merged with the petitioner society, it is the obligation of the petitioner society to comply the order passed under Section 7A of the Act. If the petitioner intends to challenge the order passed under Section 7A, it has to file an appeal as provided under Section 7(i) of the Act. 5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is permitted to file an appeal before the appropriate Tribunal against the order passed under Section 7A of the Act within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Till such appeal is filed there shall be stay of recovery of the amount subject to the condition that the petitioner depositing half of the demanded amount within a period of four weeks from today. The prohibitory order is kept under suspension for a period of four weeks so as to enable the petitioner to operate the account. 6. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________________________ Justice B.Seshasayana Reddy 13th February, 2009. KM THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 2436 OF 2009 13th February, 2009.