1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR MCA No.. 637/2010 IN Writ Petition No..1717/005 (D) Central Board of Provident Fund, Employees Provident Fund Organization and others vs. National Textiles Corporation and others. MCA NO. 617/2010 IN Writ Petition No.5440/2005 Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Provident Fund Organization, Nagpur and another VS. Model Mills, Nagpur and another. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Dr. R.S. Sundaram, Adv. for the applicants. Mr. M.G. Bhangde, Sr. Advocate with Adv. R.B. Puranik, for respondent no.1. CORAM: B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 7TH JULY, 2010. 1] Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 2] M.C.As. for review are preferred by the Provident Fund Department in the disposed of writ petition. The prayer is restricted during argument only to recall of direction to recover the costs of Rs. 15,000/- as imposed on the officers found guilty in the inquiry for ignoring fax message. Civil Application No. 1161/2010 is preferred by the petitioners seeking permission to withdraw the bank guarantee. 2 3] Advocate Sundaram contends that steps for attachment were taken only in the interest of workers and as the same were bonafide the direction to recover costs from officers who ignored fax message should be recalled. The request is opposed by Senior Advocate, who relies upon the findings in judgment dated 8.12.2009 in both matters. 4] Learned Senior Advocate has further pointed out that at the time of admitting the writ petitions, total amount claimed was Rs. 8.84 crores and out of it 4.84 crores was on account of alleged difference of 2% in rate of interest applied by establishment and the rate of interest alleged to be statutory by the Department. Amount of Rs. Four crores was on account of damages. His contention of recovery of Rs. 4.84 crores is set aside by this Court and B.I.F.R. has recommended total waiver of damages. The representation made by establishment for such waiver are still pending with the Competent Authority. He, therefore, contends that bank guarantee, which expires today should be allowed to be withdrawn. 5] Advocate Sundaram appearing for the 3 department states that because of observations of this Court in judgment and liberty given, an inquiry to find out beneficial provisions, if any, to workers has been undertaken under Section 7-A and that inquiry is still pending. His contention is that the bank guarantee is required to be continued further for realisation of the amount, which may be found due in such inquiry. 6] Learned Senior Advocate has contended that there is no such liberty as alleged by the department in the matter and alleged inquiry under under Section 7-A has got no bearing on the present controversy. 7] It is apparent that bank guarantee was ordered for total amount of Rs. 8.84 crores then demanded. The break up given is not in dispute. The recovery of Rs. 4.84 crores is already set aside. The proceedings for waiver of damages are still pending. The amount of damages then worked out was Rs. Four crores. In these circumstances, the applicants i. e. National Textiles Corporation and its Unit Model Mills are directed to continue bank guarantee for amount of Rs. Four crores (towards damages) for a period of three months from 2nd 4 July, 2010. The bank guarantee over and above this amount is allowed to be withdrawn by them. 8] The prayer for recall of order imposing costs cannot be granted as this Court has found that the specific instructions to the contrary issued by Head Office were overlooked and ignored by the Regional Officers. The MCAs. are therefore rejected. 9] Advocate Sundaram states that insofar as release of part of bank guarantee is concerned, the said order be stayed for a period of two weeks. Senior Advocate is opposing the said request. However, in the interest of justice and in order to enable the department to have fair trial in the matter, the said direction is stayed for a period of two weeks. The direction shall cease to operate automatically after the period of two weeks from today. JUDGE Ambulkar.