IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 11TH APRIL 2011 / 21ST CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 11400 of 2011(Y) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. JAY ENTERPRISES, THENGUVILAYIL BUILDING, PANAVILA JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING PARTNER, T.C.VARGHESE. 2. M/S.JAY SALES CORPORATION, UNIT TOWER, M.G.COLLEGE JUNCTION, KESAVADASAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY ITS PROPRIETOR, T.C.VARGHESE. * NAME OF THE IST & 2ND PETITIONER IS CORRECTED AS : 1. M/S. JAJ ENTERPRISES. 2. M/S. JAJ SALES CORPORATION AS PER ORDER DTD. 11.04.2011 IN IA. NO.6862 OF 2011. ** DESCRIPTION OF 2ND PETITIONER IS CORRECTED AS: T.C.VARGHESE, PROPRIETOR, M/S.JAJ SALES CORPORATION, UNIT TOWER, M.G.COLLEGE JUNCTION, KESAVADASAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. AS PER ORDER DTD. 11.04.2011 IN IA. NO.6861 OF 2011. BY ADVS. SRI.T.M.CHANDRAN SRI.S.SUJITH tss W.P.(C) NO. 11400/2011 RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, REGIONALL OFFICE, PATTOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004. 2. SRI.SUBASH, REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER-1, REGIONAL OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004. BY ADV. SMT.T.N.GIRIJA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING FINALLY HEARD ON ON 11/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss W.P.(C) NO.11400/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE REPORT NO.KR/COV/EO.SQUAD/2009 OF THE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS. P2:- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 20.1.2010 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. P3:- COPY OF THE SUMMONS DTD. 12.4.2010 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. P4:- COPY OF THE OBJECTION DTD. 15.9.2010 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. P5:- COPY OF THE PETITION DTD. 8.10.2010 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. P6:- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 18.2.2011 DESPATCHED ON 23.2.2011 TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 11400 OF 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of April, 2011 J U D G M E N T Ext.P6 order passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees' Provident Fund Organisation, Regional Office, Thiruvananthapuram under section 7A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) is under challenge in this writ petition. The main ground raised in the writ petition is that the Enforcement Officer who had inspected the petitioners' establishment and filed a report, was not available for cross- examination and therefore Ext.P6 order, which is based on the report submitted by the Enforcement Officer, is liable to be set aside. 2. Ext.P6 order was passed on 18.1.2011. It was sent to the petitioners on 23.2.2011. Under section 7A of the Act, an appeal lies from Ext.P6 order to the Employees' Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal. The period of limitation prescribed for filing the appeal is 60 days from the date of communication of the order. Further, the Tribunal is also empowered to pass interim orders and also to pass WPC No.11400/2011 2 orders waiving the pre-deposit subject to such terms and conditions as stipulated. In such circumstances, as the period of limitation prescribed for filing an appeal from Ext.P6 order has not expired, I am of the opinion that the petitioners should invoke the appellate remedy available to them instead of seeking the intervention of this Court at this stage. All the contentions which the petitioners have raised can be put forward in the appeal before the Employees' Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal which is not confined to questions of law alone. Therefore, the petitioners cannot be heard to contend that the appellate remedy is not meaningful or effective. I therefore find no grounds to entertain the writ petition. The writ petition fails and is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to challenge Ext.P6 in appeal before the Employees' Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps