IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 9TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 20TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 4139 of 2009(P) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- EDWARD STEPHEN, MANAGING DIRECTOR, EX-SERVICEMEN INDUSTRIAL GUARDS PVT. LTD., EASWARAVILASOM ROAD, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.ANIL NARAYANAN MR.S.D.ASOKAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, REPRESENTED BY THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, PATTOM PALACE.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -4. 2. THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, PATTOM PALACE.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -4. 3. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI. MS.T.N.GIRIJA, SC FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.4139 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 9th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner submits that his establishment is covered under the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. Ext.P1 is an order passed by the 2nd respondent exercising his powers under Section 7A of the Act holding that the petitioner is liable to remit the amount mentioned therein. 2. According to the petitioner on receipt of Ext.P1, he has filed Ext.P2 before the 2nd respondent seeking review of Ext.P1, invoking the powers under Section 7B of the Act. Orders have not been passed on Ext.P2. In the meanwhile, the petitioner apprehends that coercive steps will be initiated against the petitioner to recover the amount due under Ext.P1. It is with that grievance, the writ petition is filed. 3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as also the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. 4. As already stated, according to the petitioner on receipt of Ext.P1 issued under Section 7A of the Act, Ext.P2 application has WPC No.4139/2009 -2- been made by him by invoking Section 7B of the Act. So long as Ext.P2 is pending, in my view, steps, if any, taken for recovery of the amount under Ext.P1 is premature. 5. Therefore, I direct the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 with notice to the petitioner, which shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within eight weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. In the meanwhile, it is directed that further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1 shall be kept in abeyance. 6. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg