IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2009 / 17TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 11744 of 2009(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- N.JAYAPRAKASH, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O.LATE.G.P.NANOO, PROPRIETOR, M/S.PRAKASH CASHEWS, MYLAMKULAM, PUTHOOR, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.RAJA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN., P.B.NO.1016, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 2. THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EPF SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, OLD MUNICIPAL BUILDING, CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM. 3. THE RECOVERY OFFICER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, P.B.NO.1016, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004. BY SC SRI. V.V.SURESH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC,J. --------------------- W.P.(C).No.11744 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the 7th day of April, 2009. JUDGMENT Petitioner is an establishment covered by the provisions of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act. Ext.P1 is an order passed by the respondent, exercising his powers under Section 7A of the Act, direction the petitioner to remit an additional contribution of Rs.3,26,762/-. Aggrieved by this the petitioner has filed Ext.P2 appeal before the appellate Tribunal along with Ext.P3, an application seeking stay of Ext.P1. Orders have not been passed on Ext.P3 and in the meanwhile by Exts.P5 and P6, respondent is seeking to initiate co-coercively action against the petitioner for realizing the amount due under Ext.P1. It is with this grievance the writ petition is filed. Wp(c).No.11744/09 2 2. I heard the counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the standing counsel appearing for the respondent. 3. Counsel for the respondent submits that absence of any stay order passed by the Tribunal, they are entitled to realise the amount due under Ext.P1 and that therefore Exts.P5 and P6 are justified. 4. Irrespective of the controversies that are raised by the respondents, the fact remains that the petitioner's appeal and application for stay are pending consideration of the Tribunal and orders have not bee passed on the said application. In these circumstances I am inclined to direct the Tribunal to pass orders on the stay petition keeping in abeyance Exts.P5 and P6. Accordingly, the writ Petition is disposed of directing the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal before which Ext.P3 stay petition is pending shall consider the same and pass orders thereon as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 3 months from the date of production of a copy of Wp(c).No.11744/09 3 the judgment. It is directed that in the meanwhile further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P5 and P6 will be kept in abeyance. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ Wp(c).No.11744/09 4