IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No 9691 of 2005 Nisheeth Jaiswal, son of late D D Jaiswal, resident of Mohalla - Industrial Estate, Patliputra Colony, Patna - 800 013 - Petitioner Versus 1 Provident Fund Commissioner Patna Division, Patna 2 Office of the Recovery Officer, Serpentine Road, Patna through R N Prasad, Recovery Officer 3 Shri R N Prasad, son of name not known, Recovery Officer, Serpentine Road, Patna - Respondents ----------- 2 30.04.2009 The petitioner challenges the demand notice issued by the Recovery Officer under the provisions of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act. In my view, petitioner must approach the concerned authorities and get the details of the proceedings and take appropriate action, as he may be advised. The notices impugned are merely demand notices by the Recovery Officer and they cannot be said to be without jurisdiction in any manner unless the petitioner obtains the details and contests the matter. On behalf of petitioner, it is submitted that warrants have been issued in the proceedings. Let it be noted that this writ petition has been pending in this Court for over four years and it is because of that, on advice, the petitioner had not taken any steps in those proceedings before the Recovery Officer. The Recovery Officer would consider this as a material fact, if an application is made for withdrawal of the warrants. With these observations, this application is disposed of. M.E.H./ (Navaniti Prasad Singh) - 2 -