IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 21ST FEBRUARY 2008 / 2ND PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 6048 of 2008(T) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ K.K.SHANAVAS, PROPRIETOR, M/S. SREE PARVATHY CASHEW COMPANY, CHERUPOIKA, PAVITHRESWARAM, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.N.RAGHURAJ RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM-691 001. 2. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUNDS APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, 9TH FLOOR, MAYUR BHAVAN, CONNAUGHT PLACE, NEW DELHI-110 001. BY ADV. SRI.S.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR (SR.) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No.6048 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 21st day of February, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has been assessed to contributions under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act. By Ext.P1 order, orders have been passed under Section 7A of the Act. Against Ext.P1 order, the petitioner has filed Ext.P2 appeal along with which, he has also filed a separate application seeking interim orders. The complaint of the petitioner is that since the Tribunal is not functioning properly, the petitioner is unable to move the Tribunal for interim orders and at the same time, the respondents are taking coercive proceedings for recovery of the disputed amounts. The petitioner, therefore, seeks a stay of recovery of the disputed amounts till the disposal of the appeal. 2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Provident Fund Organization opposes the same. He submits that the petitioner may be directed to pay at least 50 per cent of the amounts due. 3. I have considered the arguments of both sides. 2 4. I am of opinion that a party should not be prejudiced because of the inability of the Tribunal to consider the interim application filed by the party because of the internal problems in the office of the Tribunal when the petitioner has already moved the Tribunal for interim orders. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: (a) The Tribunal shall pass orders on the interim application submitted by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. (b) Till orders are so passed by the Tribunal, coercive proceedings for recovery of the disputed amounts covered by Ext.P1 shall be kept in abeyance. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 3