IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 27049 of 2007 Between: M/s. Sunayana Security Services Private Limited, 35-68, Gopal Krishna Colony, Sainikpuri, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Managing Director, Lt. Col (Retd.) L.V.G.K. Rao. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Employees Provident Funds Appellagte Tribunal, 9th Floor, Mayur Bhavan, Connaught Circus, New Dehi, Rep. by its Secretary. 2 The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Regional Office, 3-4- 763, Bhavishyanidhi Bhavan, Barkatpura, Hyderaad -27. 3 Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner (Compliance), Regional Office, 3-4-763, bhavishyanidhi Bhavan, Barkatpura, Hyderabad-27. .....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 a Writ of Manamus declare the inactio of the 1st respondent in taking on record the appeal filed by the Petitioner challenging the orders of the 3rd respondent AP/35697/Enf.C.II/T- 1/2007/158 dated 24-4-2007 and numbering the same as arbitrary, ultra vires the provisions of the PF Act and violative of the rights guaranteed under Article 14, 19(1)(g) and 300A of the Constitution of India and consquenty direct the 1st respondent to receive the appeal of the Petitioner against the order of the 3rd respondent AP/35697/Enf.C.II/T- 1/2007/158 dated 24-4-2007 and number the same and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.BALAJI VARMA Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.R.N.REDDY (SC FOR EMPLOY'S PF ORG.) The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition has been filed by M/s.Sunayana Security Services Pvt. Ltd., assailing the inaction of the Employees’ Provident Funds Appellate Tribunal-1st respondent in considering the appeal presented by it under the provisions of Section 7(I) of the Employees’ Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short, ‘the Act’). 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 2 & 3. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner filed an appeal against the Order dated 24.04.2007 passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner (Compliance), Hyderabad- 3rd respondent and the said appeal remained unattended. 4. In view of the relief sought for by the petitioner, the writ affidavit is not required to be detailed elaborately. Since the appeal filed by the petitioner is stated to be under consideration by the Employees’ Provident Funds Appellate Tribunal-1st respondent, I deem it appropriate to direct the 1st respondent to consider the appeal filed by the petitioner and dispose of the same in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage. No costs. ________________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:19th June, 2008. cs ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS}