THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.27483 of 2009 ORDER: 1 Though this Writ Petition is listed under the caption ‘interlocutory’, at request of the counsel appearing on both sides, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the interlocutory stage itself. 2 Petitioner is an educational society. In this Writ Petition petitioner has questioned the notice of recovery, dated 11.12.2009 issued by the Enforcement Officer, Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Hyderabad i.e. second respondent herein. In the aforesaid order, it is stated that the Enforcement Officer has visited the establishment of the petitioner on 11.12.2009 and noticed that the petitioner has not remitted the provident fund dues amounting to Rs.3,53,899/-. In that view of the matter, the petitioner was requested to remit the said amount by way of demand draft or to produce challans in proof of payment of such dues. 3 It is the case of the petitioner that so far as the petitioner society is concerned, no dues are there, on account of provident fund payable under the provisions of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short ‘the Act’). 4 The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner (Legal) working in the office of the first respondent herein filed a detailed counter affidavit referring to the notice dated 10.02.2010 explaining under what circumstances the second respondent herein had issued the impugned notice of recovery dated 11.12.2009. 5 During the course of hearing, a copy of the proceedings dated 10.12.2010 is placed on record. From a perusal of the aforesaid proceedings, it is clear that the petitioner has purchased M/s.Tetrahedron Junior College on 17.6.2003 and in view of the provisions contained in Section 17 B of the Act, the petitioner is liable to pay an amount of Rs.3,53,899/- and as such the petitioner was requested to pay the said amount. Further, from the said proceedings it is to be noticed that an opportunity was also given to the petitioner to meet the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner along with the necessary supporting documents to ventilate its grievance if any. 6 It is the case of the petitioner that they have purchased the building and land only and there is no transfer of college as alleged and in that view of the matter, they are not liable to pay any provident fund dues which are actually due from M/s.Tetrahedron Junior College. The impugned proceedings dated 11.12.2009 is neither an order determining the liability nor a notice demanding the petitioner to pay the said amount. In the aforesaid proceedings the petitioner was only requested to pay the amount and an opportunity was also given to the petitioner to represent its case along with necessary supporting documentary evidence, in case it is not liable to pay any amount. 7 In view of the fact that there is no liability determined against the petitioner and having regard to the averment that the petitioner has purchased only the building and land of the erstwhile Tetrahedron Junior College and as there is no transfer of the college, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition permitting the petitioner to make a detailed representation before the first respondent along with necessary supporting documents in support of his plea that he has merely purchased the property and that there is no transfer of the college i.e. M/s.Tetrahedron Junior College and it is not liable to pay any amount. If any such representation is filed along with supporting documents, the respondent authorities shall consider the same and take further steps in accordance with law. 8 Subject to the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. -------------------------- R.Subhash Reddy, J. 02.12.2011 Kvsn