ASN 1 RPW-161.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION NO. 161 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO.5835 OF 2008 Maharashtra State Co-operative Bank Ltd. ..Petitioners. Vs. The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner/ Recovery Officer and anr. ..Respondents. Mrs.Varsha Palav for the Petitioners. Mr.Suresh Kumar for Respondent No.1. CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 07, 2011. PC : On 7th April, 2010 the Division Bench of this Court presided over by then Hon’ble the Chief Justice decided bunch of writ petitions. 2 The present petitioners had also filed Writ Petition bearing Writ Petition No. 5835 of 2008. It is not disputed that same was directed to be heard along with other petitions which were disposed of by the said order and that the controversy involved is also identical . It is stated that this writ petition arises out of the proceedings which were initiated by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner/Recovery Officer of Employees’ Provident Fund Organization placed at Nagpur against the ASN 2 RPW-161.sxw respondent No.2 which is a Co-operative Sugar factory functioning in Wardha District, therefore, this writ petition was initially filed before the Nagpur Bench and later on, the same came to be transferred to the Principal Bench. It is urged in the writ petition that the order of attachment of immovable property dated 4th January, 2008 of the respondent No.1 stipulated dues of Rs.9808162/- as per Recovery Certificate No.4 dated 25th January, 2007. The respondent No.1 had also recovered some amount by way of sale of suger stock and therefore, nothing more than the sum specified in the order of respondent No.1 can be recovered. This was a crucial fact and the same was not brought to the notice of this Court and therefore, while disposing of the writ petition by common order dated 7th April, 2010. the Court noted that the calculations provided by the Provident Fund Commissioner /Recovey Officer are final. The petitioners are a Apex Co-operative Bank and would like to urge before this Court that the liability of the establishment towards the Provident Fund dues is crystallized by the documents which have been produced on record by the Provident Fund Commissioner and it is not Rs.3,93,34,694/- as urged but approximately Rs.1.10 Crore. 3 After the matter was heard for some time both sides agree that the order dated 7th April, 2010 can be recalled only to the extent it disposes of Writ Petition No.5835/2008 and the said writ petition can be restored to the file of this Court. 4 In the light of this agreed position, we allow this review application and make it absolute in term of prayer clause (b). The order dated 7th April, 2010 is recalled only to the extent of Writ Petition No. ASN 3 RPW-161.sxw 5835 of 2008 and the said writ petition stands restored to the file of this Court.The said writ petition be placed before the appropriate bench for final hearing. The amount of Rs.3/- Crores deposited with the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner at Nagpur be retained by him until further orders in the writ petition. CHIEF JUSTICE S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.