IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7462 of 2008 DISTRICT RURAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, NALANDA(BIHAR SHARIF), VIKAS BHAWAN, NALANDA COLLECTORATE, TOWN BIHARSHARIF, DISTRICT NALANDA THROUGH ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CUM DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, NALANDA, SADAT HASSAN MINTO. Versus 1. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, BHAVISHYA NIDHI BHAWAN, R-BLOCK, ROAD NO.6, BIHAR, PATNA THROUGH THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER. 2. THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISISONER, BHAVISHYA NIDHI BHAWAN, R-BLOCK, ROAD NO.6, BIHAR PATNA. 3. THE ASSISTNAT PROVIDNET FUND COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISISONER, BHAVISHYA NIDHI BHAWAN, R-BLOCK, ROAD NO.6, BIHAR PATNA. 4. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, BIHARSHARIF MAIN BRANCH, NALANDA. For the petitioner : Mr. Nikesh Kumar, Advocate. For the Employees Provident Fund : Mr. R.S. Pradhan, Sr. Adv. For the State Bank of India : Mr. S.D. Sanjay, Advocate. ----------- 05. 05.01.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, State Bank of India and the counsel for the Employees Provident Fund Organization. 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Patna dated 13.5.1991, Annexure-7, whereunder all the District Rural Development Agencies of Bihar have been directed to contribute towards the employees provident fund in terms of the provisions contained in Sub-Section(4) of Section-1 of the Employees Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952(hereinafter referred to as the Act). He is also aggrieved by the order dated 6.2.2008 passed by the Assistant - 2 - Provident Fund Commissioner, Bihar, Anneuxre-10, whereunder its liability has been fixed. Petitioner is also aggrieved by the attachment notice dated 10.3.2008, Annexure-11, whereunder a sum of Rs.59 lacs and odd has been attached. 3. Against the aforesaid three impugned orders petitioner has remedy of appeal in terms of the provision contained in Section- 7I of the Act. It appears without availing the remedy of appeal petitioner approached this Court highlighting the point that employees serving the District Rural Development Agency are members of the contributory provident fund and are not required to become member of the Employees Provident Fund Organization. 4. Aforesaid submission along with other submission that neither the petitioner organization nor its employees ever volunteered to become the member of the Employees Provident Fund Organization can be better appreciated if petitioner files appeal against the impugned order. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal, which should be disposed of, as early as possible, in any case within two months from the date of receipt of the memo of appeal. The amount attached under Annexure-11 and debited under debit note dated 15.6.2010, Annexure-18 be refunded to the petitioner organization, if the same exceeds 75% of the liability. Rajesh/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)