IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 3RD JULY 2009 / 12TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 18579 of 2009(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- N.NANDAKUMAR, PROPRIETOR, M/S. VISHNU CASHEW COMPLEX, MYLOM, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.SURESH KUMAR RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI. 2. THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES' PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, MANNANIYA COMPLEX, ANDAMUKKAM, KOLLAM-691 001. 3. THE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, MANNANIYA COMPLEX, ANDAMUKKAM, KOLLAM-691 001. BY SC, SRI. PIRAPPANCODE V.SW. SUDHIR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 18579 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 3rd July,2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the proprietor of a cashew factory. Petitioner's grievance is that now contributions have been assessed under the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act in respect of the periods prior to the date when the petitioner became the owner of the cashew factory. Against orders under Section 7A of the Act passed by the 2nd respondent, the petitioner has filed an appeal, Ext.P2, before the 1st respondent, Tribunal. Petitioner submits that during the pendency of the appeal, respondents 2 and 3 are initiating coercive proceedings for recovery of the disputed amounts. The petitioner, in Ext.P2 appeal, has incorporated a prayer for stay of operation of the impugned order and because of the fact that the tribunal is not regularly sitting, he is unable to obtain interim order in the appeal. The petitioner, in the above circumstances, seeks stay of recovery of the disputed amounts, pending disposal of W.P ( C) No. 18579 of 2009 2 Ext.P2 appeal. 2. I have heard the learned standing counsel for the Provident Fund Organisation also who opposes the prayers. 3. I feel that since the petitioner has already moved the Tribunal by filing Ext.P2 appeal in which a prayer for an interim order is also included, the petitioner should be given some time to obtain orders from the Tribunal in that regard. Accordingly, I dispose of this writ petition as follows: The 1st respondent shall consider the interim prayers of the petitioner in Ext.P2 appeal as expeditiously as possible. Till orders are passed on admission and interim prayers in Ext.P2 appeal, further coercive proceedings for recovery of the amounts disputed in Ext.P2 appeal shall be kept in abeyance. Thereafter, petitioner shall abide by the orders passed by the Tribunal. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 18579 of 2009 3 (V.GIRI,JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 18579 of 2009 4 W.P ( C) No. 18579 of 2009 5 (V.GIRI,JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 18579 of 2009 6 W.P ( C) No. 18579 of 2009 7