WP(C) 3581/2003 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY Heard Mr. L.P. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. P.K. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.2 to 4. None appears for the respondent No.1. The petitioner which is a proprietorial firm of Shri Ratan Lahkar, has c hallenged the warrant of arrest dated 05.05.2003 issued by the Asstt. Provident Fund Commissioner (ENF) basically on the ground that before issuance of such war rant of arrest no order was passed by the authority for such issuance. According to the petitioner, on receipt of the notices in the proceeding initiated by the respondent authority under Section 7A of the Employees Provident Funds and Misc ellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, he filed an application on 20.06.2002 seeking ad journment of the proceeding till the month of March, 2003, as he was to remain o utside Guwahati in connection with staging the theatre in different places in As sam as well as outside the State of Assam, which prayer, however, was not consid ered and different orders were passed fixing different dates without passing any order for issuance of any warrant of arrest. Mr. L.P. Sharma, learned counsel f or the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner even now is ready and willin g to participate in the proceeding under the provisions of 1952 Act. Mr. P.K. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.2 to 4 su bmits that the warrant of arrest had to be issued due to non-participation of th e proceeding by the petitioner despite receipt of the notice of the proceeding i nitiated under Section 7A of the 1952 Act. The learned counsel, however, has sub mitted that since the execution of the warrant of arrest has been stayed by this Court vide order dated 30.05.2003, which order is still continuing, without goi ng into the legality and validity of issuance of warrant of arrest, the writ pet ition may be disposed of directing the petitioner to participate in the aforesai d proceeding, however, giving liberty to the respondent authorities to pass nece ssary order relating to issuance of the warrant of arrest, if the occasion so ar ises in future. It appears that the petitioner has challenged the warrant of arrest issu ed apart from the proceeding initiated by the respondents under Section 7A of th e 1952 Act. In the said proceeding admittedly notices have been issued to the pe titioner, who is yet to file objection. By interim order dated 30.05.2003 the ex ecution of the warrant of arrest issued, which is under challenge, has been stay ed and the said order is still continuing. As noticed above, the petitioner is ready and willing to participate in the proceeding initiated under Section 7A of the 1952 Act. That being the positi on, without going into the legality and/or validity of the warrant of arrest iss ued, the present writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to appear before the Asstt. Provident Fund Commissioner (ENF), Guwahati on 17.08.2011 alo ng with his objection, if any, against the proceeding. The Asstt. Provident Fund Commissioner thereafter shall decide the proceeding by a speaking order in acco rdance with law. The petitioner shall also produce the relevant records to subst antiate his objection, if any, to be filed. An endeavour may be made by the Asst t. Provident Fund Commissioner to decide the said proceeding by middle of Septem ber, 2011. The warrant of arrest issued on 05.05.2003 shall not be executed. How ever, it would not preclude the Asstt. Provident Fund Commissioner to issue a fr esh warrant of arrest in the event of failure of the petitioner to participate i n the proceeding and if the occasion so arises, which naturally has to be done b y recording the reasons therefor. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.