IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No :15122 of 2010 Between: M/S.Maruthi Cottex Limited, Nalgonda District and another. ..... PETITIONERS AND The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner (compliance-ii), Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No :15122 of 2010 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondent in rejecting the review petition made by the petitioner under Section 7-B of the Employees’ Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short ‘the Act’) without giving an opportunity to the petitioner, as arbitrary and illegal. The material available on record shows that Provident Fund arrears allegedly due from the petitioner- company was determined under Section 7-A of the Act by order dated 01.04.2010. The petitioner company made a petition under Section 7-B of the Act seeking review of the order dated 01.04.2010 stating that the person who was maintaining the record including ESI and PF registers left the services of the company without handing over the records and therefore, the petitioner-company could not produce the relevant records and requesting two weeks time to produce the records before the Enforcement Officer, Nalgonda. However, by order dated 23.06.2010, the review petition was rejected holding that the petitioner failed to bring any new evidence which was not within his knowledge and therefore, there was no merit to entertain the review application. Aggrieved by the said order, the present writ petition has been filed. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri R.N.Reddy appearing for the respondents-Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner. A perusal of the impugned order shows that none of the grounds pleaded in the petitioner’s review application were considered and the review petition was rejected holding that there was no mistake apparent on the face of the record. Having regard to the explanation offered by the petitioner for its inability to produce the records during the enquiry under Section 7-A of the Act and the undertaking to produce the same within two weeks, I am of the opinion that the respondent was not justified in rejecting the review petition. Affording an opportunity to the petitioner to produce the record would enable the respondent to pass the appropriate orders on merits. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 23.6.2010 is hereby set aside and the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to give an opportunity to the petitioner-company to produce the record and then after hearing him pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. It is made clear that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent and produce the record on 12.7.2010 and appropriate orders shall be passed by the respondent within two weeks thereafter. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _______________ Justice G.Rohini Date:02.7.2010 Note: Furnish CC in 3 days. mrb