IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO.782 of 2008 and WRIT PETITION NO.7118 OF 2008 1. WRIT APPEAL NO.782 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 19.06.2008 in W.P.M.P.No.9346 of 2008 in W.P.No.7118 OF 2008 on the file of the High Court.) Between: M/s. Vasudeva Traders Gurbabadi Road Nizamabad Rep.by its Manager Sri P.Hari Gopal S/o. P.Sathaiah R/o.Nizamabad District. ...APPELLANT AND 1 Employees Provident Fund Organization Rep.by its Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Sub Regional Office, Nyankal Road Nizamabad –503001. 2 Employees Provident Fund Organization Rep.by its Asst Provident Fund Commissioner Sub Regional Office, Nyankal Road Nizamabad - 503001. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant: MR.A.K.JAYAPRAKASH RAO Counsel for the Respondents: MR.R.N.REDDY (SC FOR EMPLOY'S PF ORG.) 2. WRIT PETITION NO.7118 OF 2008 Between: M/s. Vasudeva Traders Gurbabadi Road Nizamabad Rep.by its Manager Sri P.Hari Gopal S/o. P.Sathaiah R/o.Nizamabad District. ...PETITIONER AND 1 Employees Provident Fund Oraganization Rep.by its Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Sub Regional Office Nyankal Road Nizamabad –503001. 2 Employees Provident Fund Oraganization Rep.by its Asst Provident Fund Commissioner Sub Regional Office Nyankal Road Nizamabad - 503001. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to call for the records from the respondents and issue an appropriate writ, order direction particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not entertaining the application to set-aside the ex parte order and rejecting the same on 263-2008 by conﬁrming the order in proceedings No.AP/SRO/NZB/ENF/7A/4710/2007/1978 dt 12-3-2007 as illegal unjust contrary to law arbitrary in violative of principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14,16 and 21 of the constitution of India and grant all consequential benefits. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.K.JAYAPRAKASH RAO Counsel for the Respondents: MR.R.N.REDDY (SC FOR EMPLOY'S PF ORG.) The Court delivered the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO.782 of 2008 and WRIT PETITION NO.7118 OF 2008 COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Mr Justice B.Prakash Rao) The appellant ﬁled this appeal against an interlocutory order pending Writ Petition, wherein he challenged the impugned proceedings dated 12.03.2007. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances and at the request of the counsel on either side, the present appeal and also W.P.No.7118 of 2008 are taken up together for disposal. In the Writ Petition, the petitioner-appellant seeks to assail the order dated 12.03.2007 purported to be passed under Section 7-A of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (“the Act” for brevity), which according to him is virtually an ex parte order and the said order is not served on him. Subsequently, when he approached the oﬃce of the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Enforcement, by way of an application dated 26.03.2008, the ﬁrst respondent refused to entertain the said application on the ground that the petitioner has been trying to trot the entire proceedings and avoiding to discharge the liabilities. Hence, the appeal. Having heard on either side and on perusal of the material available on record, it is seen that admittedly, the order dated 12.03.2007 is an ex parte order. No doubt, the petitioner-appellant did not appear, but the said order is not served immediately, as normally contemplated. It is only when the appellant has approached the second respondent by way of an application dated 26.03.2008 pointing out the non- serving thereof, it is stated that the said order was served on 18.03.2008. The application ﬁled on 26.03.2008 was rejected on the ground that there have been several attempts by the petitioner-appellant to trot the proceedings. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and especially in regard to the version of the respondents that there has been service of the order dated 12.03.2007 in the normal circumstances is found to be incorrect and it is only when the appellant walk into the oﬃce of the respondents, it was served. Admittedly, the proceedings dated 12.03.2007 are ex parte, without any opportunity. Hence, it is felt desirable that the orders shall be passed under Section 7-A of the Act, afresh after giving an opportunity to either side. In view of the above, the Writ Appeal and the Writ Petition are allowed. The orders dated 12.03.2007 and 26.03.2008 are set aside. The ﬁrst respondent shall proceed with the enquiry afresh after giving notice and opportunity to both the sides on merits. _________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, J) ________________ (R.KANTHA RAO, J) 4th September 2008 RRB