IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH AUGUST 2011 / 2ND BHADRA 1933 WA.No. 1225 of 2011() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.11400/2011 Dated 11/04/2011 .................... APPELLANTS/ PETITIONERS ------------------------- 1. JAJ ENTERPRISES, THENGUVILAYIL BUILDINGS, PANAVILA JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING PARTNER T.C VARGHESE 2. T.C. VARGHESE, PROPRIETOR, M/S.JAJ SALES CORPORATION, UNIT TOWER, M.G. COLLEGE JUNCTION, KESAVADASAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.CHANDRAN SRI.S.SUJITH RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS ----------------------- 1. ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, PATTOM.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 004. 2. SUBASH, REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER -I, REGIONAL OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004. ADV. SRI.N.N. SUGUNAPALAN, SC, P.F. FOR R1-2 SMT.T.N.GIRIJA, SC,EPF ORGANISATION FOR R1-2 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. -------------------------------- W.A.No.1225 OF 2011 -------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of August, 2011 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ C.N.Ramachandran Nair, J. Appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge declining to interfere with adjudication order issued by the statutory authority for the reason that remedy by way of appeal is available to the appellant. Eventhough the Writ Appeal against the judgment of the learned Single Judge was filed long back it has come up for admission only now. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellants and after hearing the standing counsel for the respondents, we do not find any justification to deviate from the view taken by the learned Single Judge, particularly when mixed questions of facts and law arise for consideration. Counsel for the appellant submitted that time for filing appeal is over because of the filing of the W.P.(C) and Writ Appeal before this Court. This is opposed by the counsel for the respondent contending that Tribunal does not have powers to condone delay beyond 60 days. W.A.No.1225/2011 2 2. Having regard to the fact that the delay is on account of the pendency of the matter in this Court at two levels, we feel we can order condonation of delay on conditions. Accordingly, we grant one month's time to the appellant to pay Rs.3.5 lakhs of the demand and file appeal along with receipt of the same. If Rs.3.5.lakhs is paid and the appeal is filed before the statutory authority against adjudication order, then there will be a direction to the statutory authority to entertain the appeal as one filed in time, issue notice to parties, hear both sides and decide the matter within four months from the date of filing of the appeal. In the event of filing of appeal on payment of Rs.3.5 lakhs, recovery of the balance amount will remain stayed till disposal of appeal by statutory authority. If payment is not paid and the appeal filed within 30 days, the entire amount could be recovered. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE) ps/24/8