THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.26838 of 2008 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed with the prayer, which reads as under: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing notice No.AP/PF/Recovery /47096/2008 dated 10.11.2008 basing upon ex-parte Recovery Certificate No.RRc.No.ENF/43/2008 dated 10.4.2008 which is not served upon petiitoner till now and seizure of Computer equipments on 4.11.2008 without notice/hearing as illegal, arbitrary,unjust discriminatory unreasonable without jurisdiction opposed to public policy, violative of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 14,21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and also violative of principles of natural justice and set aside all the proceedings by issuing consequential directions viz. (a) to return the Computer Equipments seized without notice/hearing on 4.11.2008 (b) to conduct enquiry a fresh into all the arrears including period interest, penalties etc., in respect alleged recovery certificate dated 10.4.2008 and (c) to delete the petitioner School from coverage of EPF Act 1952 after conducting enquiry afresh as per law and also award costs.” Petitioner is a high school. There is an ex parte Recovery Certificate issued by the first respondent - Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation, Sub- Regional Office, Nyalkal Road, Nizamabad, determining the liability of the petitioner at Rs.2,57,559/-, on 10.04.2008 vide RRC.No.ENF/43/2008. The said Certificate was issued on the ground that in spite of service of notice, the petitioner has not produced records. On the ground that the petitioner has not paid the amount determined under Section 7A of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, the impugned notice is issued to show cause why he should not be arrested and detained in civil prison for the purpose of executing the Recovery Certificate. The petitioner disputes the coverage on the ground that the total employees working in the institution are less than 20. It also disputes the quantum of determined amount. Under Section 7A(4) of the Act, when an ex parte order is passed, he can apply to set aside such order and if he satisfies the officer that the show cause notice was not duly served or that he was presented by any sufficient cause from appearing when the inquiry was held, the officer shall make an order setting aside his earlier order and shall appoint a date for proceeding with the inquiry. As much as the impugned notice is issued to execute the Recovery Certificate, which is an ex parte order, the petitioner can as well file an application under Section 7A(4) of the Act, but without filing such application, the petitioner rushed to this Court. In view of availability of remedy under Section 7A(4) of the Act and as much as the impugned notice is issued to execute ex parte Recovery Certificate, I deem it appropriate to permit the petitioner to submit an application under Section 7A(4) of the Act, seeking to set aside Recovery Certificate, dated 10.04.2008, within a period of two (2) months from today and the respondents are directed to receive the same without raising any objection to the effect that the petitioner has not submitted the application within a period of three (3) months from the date of communication of that order, consider the matter and take appropriate decision. Till the competent authority passes appropriate orders on the application to be filed by the petitioner, the respondents shall not take any step pursuant to show cause notice bearing No.AP/PF/Recovery/47096/2008, dated 10.11.2008. However, it is made clear that it is open to the respondents to pass appropriate orders on merits. It is also made clear that if no such application is filed by the petitioner as indicated above, it is open to the respondents to execute the impugned notice by following the provisions of the Act and the Rules made there under. The Writ Petition is allowed with the observations and directions as indicated above. No order as to costs. _______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 24th AUGUST, 2011. kvni