IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 26TH BHADRA 1930 OP.No. 19768 of 1999(C) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- P.T. KARUNAKARAN, S/O KUNHAMBU, PANACHIKANDY HOUSE, P.O., VARAM. KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.PAREETH RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. CNETRAL BOARD OF EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUNDS, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY AND CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL OFFICE, 14, HUDCO VISALA, BHIKAJI, CAMA PLACE, NEW DELHI. 2. ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, KVR TOWERS, KANNUR – 2. 3. RECOVERY OFFICER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUNDS, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, P.B. NO. 1016, PATTOM PALACE.P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. LIQUIDATOR, KANNUR DISTRICT, MOTOR TRANSPORT EMPLOYEES CO-OP. SOCIETIES LTD., OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OP. SOCIETIES, KAKKAD ROAD, KANNUR -2/ BY ADV. SRI.A.N.KUTTAN, ADDL.CGSC SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.) THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/09/2008, ALONG WITH OP NO. 17317 OF 1994 OP NO. 7031 OF 1995 OP NO. 1169 OF 1995 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP.No. 19768 of 1999(C) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 – TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE WARRANT OF ATTACHMENT OF MOVABLE PROPERTY DATED 22.4.1993 NO. KR/3404/RECOVERY/TVM/93 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPOPNDENT. EXT.P2 – TRUE COPY OF THE MAHAZAR WITH NOTICE DATED 22.4.1993 PREPARED BY S.MAHALINGAM AND N. SATHEESAN AND V.G. DIVAKARAN. EXT.P3 – TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 4.8.1993 NO. KR/3404/RECOVERY/TVM/93 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 – TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 10.5.1999 ISSUED BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER SRI. P.M. PAREETH. EXT.P5 – TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 21.7.1999 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO P.M. PAREETH, ADVOCATE, KANNUR. EXT.P6 – TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 20.12.1999 SENT BY 1ST RESPONDENT'S COUNSEL TO ASST. P.F.COMMISIONER & RECOVERY OFFICER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUNDS. EXT.P7 – TRUE COPY OF POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT RECEIVED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT'S COUNSEL FROM ASST. P.F. COMMISSIONER. EXT.P8 – TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 12.7.2000 SENT BY 1ST RESPONDENT'S COUNSEL TO ASST. P.F.COMMISSIONER. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE rhs S.SIRI JAGAN, J ================== O.P.No.19768 of 1999 ================== Dated this the 17th day of September, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner was an employee of the Kannur District Motor Transport Employees Co-operative Society Ltd, which is under liquidation as per the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. The Provident Fund Organisation proceeded against the assets of the society for recovery of amounts due under the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act. Eleven buses belonging to the society was sold in auction and an amount of Rs. 3,12,000 was realised but was kept in suspense account on account of the interim orders in O.P.17317/1994. There was also another original petition viz. O.P. No.1169/1995 pending in respect of the same subject matter. The petitioner seeks payment of an amount of Rs. 77,334/- being the wages and gratuity payable to the petitioner by the society, from the amount so kept in suspense account by the Employees Provident Fund Organisation. The petitioner also seeks a direction to the 1st respondent to institute an enquiry regarding the proceedings for sale of assets of the defunct society. 2. I have heard the Counsel for the petitioner as also the O.P.No.19768 of 1999 - 2 - Standing Counsel for the Provident Fund Organisation. The sale of buses by the Provident Fund Organisation was for realisation of amounts due under the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act. Under that Act the Provident Fund Organisation has first charge over assets of the establishment for amounts due under the Act. That being so the Provident Fund Organisation is not liable to pay amounts from the amounts realised by the sale proceedings for recovery of those amounts to anybody, even to employees of the establishment. As such the petitioner cannot claim any payment out of that amount towards wages and gratuity. For that the petitioner's remedy lies in approaching liquidator of the society. I also note that O.P. No. 17317/94 and 1169/95 were dismissed as early as on 14.3.2005 and 17.9.2003 respectively. As far as the second prayer is concerned the Provident Fund Organisation has, in exercise its statutory powers for realisation of amounts due under the Act, sold the buses. I am not satisfied that there is any irregularity in such sale warranting any enquiry as prayed for by the petitioner. In the above circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief in this writ petition and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs