1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7365 OF 2008 M/s. international Clothing Industries Ltd. ...Petitioner. Vs. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner & Ors. ...Respondents. .... Mr. Sanjeev P. Kadam with Mr.Jagdish Choudhary for the Petitioner. Ms.Shraddha Chavan with Mr.Sureshkumar for Respondent Nos.1 and 3. ..... CORAM : DR. D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J. November 18, 2008. P.C. Rule, by consent of Counsel returnable forthwith. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents waive service. By consent of Counsel and at their request taken up for hearing and final disposal. 2. An appeal has been filed by the Petitioner under Section 7 (I) of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, against an order passed under Section 7(A) on 21st June 2 2006. The appeal was accompanied by an application for waiver of deposit under Section 7(O). The EPF Appellate Tribunal passed an order on 26th July 2007 to the following effect: “The counsel for the Appellant submitted that the Respondent had attached the properties of the Appellant. Subject to the said attachment, the application filed under Section 7-O is allowed. Appeal is admitted for hearing. Shri Mahani accepted the notice for the Respondent. Copy of the appeal served on him. Let him file reply within four weeks with an advance copy of the same to the Appellant. Matter be listed for final disposal for 24.09.2007.” The proceedings are stated to be pending before the Appellate Tribunal. On 22nd February 2008, an order has been passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner in purported exercise of powers under Section 8F(2) of the Act calling upon a third party to pay the amounts due by the aforesaid third party to the Petitioner in satisfaction of the outstanding claim on account of Provident Fund dues. 3. On behalf of the Petitioner, it has been submitted that since by the order of the Tribunal dated 26th July 2007 a waiver of pre- deposit was granted subject to the attachment levied on the property 3 of the Petitioner, no further coercive steps could have been taken by the authority by taking recourse to the power under Section 8F for the purposes of recovering dues owing to the Petitioner from a third party. There is merit in the submission. The appeal filed by the Petitioner is still pending. The Petitioner has been granted waiver of pre-deposit in terms of the order dated 26th July 2007. The Tribunal has allowed the application for waiver of pre- deposit subject to the continuance of the attachment already levied. In these circumstances, the First Respondent was not justified in taking recourse to coercive steps for the recovery of the Provident Fund dues pending disposal of the appeal. Rule is accordingly made absolute in terms of prayer clause (b) by setting aside the impugned direction dated 22nd February 2008 (Exh.I). It is, however, clarified that this shall not operate to lift the attachment which has already been levied by the authority and which is directed to be continued by the EPF Appellate Tribunal's order. The petition shall accordingly stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ......