IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH AUGUST 2011 / 2ND BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 1109 of 2011(K) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S.HARRISONS MALAYALAM LTD, BRISTOW ROAD, WILLINGDON ISLAN, COCHIN-3,OWNING LAHAI ESTATE, REP.BY ITS MANAGER-LEGAL MR.M.V.MENON BY ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR PJI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.P.GOPINATH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SCOPE MINAR CORE II, 4TH FLOOR, LAXMI NAGAR DISTRICT CENTRE,LAXMI NAGAR, NEW DELHI-110092 2. THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, KERALA, "BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN" PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAUPRAM-695004 ADV. SMT.T.N.GIRIJA, SC,EPF ORGANISATION FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P(C)No.1109/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1. TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 29.6.2007 CONTAINING THE SALIENT FEATURES OF THE SCHEME OF REHABILITATION ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT. EXT.P2. TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 24.9.2004 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6.1.2005 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4. TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL PETITION (WITHOUT ITS ANNEXURES) (ATA No.147(7)/2005) DATED 7.2.2005 EXT.P5. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 18.11.2010 IN ATA NO.147(7)/2005. / TRUE COPY / P.S.TO JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.1109 of 2011 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th August, 2011 JUDGMENT Ext.P5 order passed by the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal dismissing Ext.P4 appeal filed by the petitioner from Ext.P3 order passed by the second respondent under section 14B of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 is under challenge in this writ petition. The main ground of challenge to the impugned order is that before Ext.P4 appeal was taken up for hearing on 18.11.2010 the appellant was not put on notice. Though the respondents have been served, the said averment has not so far been denied. The order passed by the Appellate Tribunal also discloses that no arguments were advanced by the appellant on 18.11.2010 and orders were reserved in the appeal after hearing the respondent. The case set out by the petitioner that the petitioner was not put on notice before the appeal was heard on 18.11.2010 has not been controverted so far. In such circumstances I am of the W.P(C).No.1109 of 2011 -:2:- opinion that the petitioner is entitled to succeed. I accordingly allow the writ petition, set aside Ext.P5 and direct the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi to take back A.T.A.No.147(7)/2005 to file, issue notice to the petitioner and the second respondent, hear them afresh and pass orders thereon expeditiously and in any event within two months from the date on which either the petitioner or the second respondent produces a certified copy of this judgment before the Tribunal. Till such time, recovery pursuant to Ext.P3 order shall be kept in abeyance. Needless to say the Tribunal shall give the petitioner and the second respondent at least two weeks' notice of the date fixed for hearing so as to enable them to appear on the date fixed for hearing. The contentions of both sides on the merits are kept open. P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge. ahg. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P(C).No.1109 of 2011 ---------------------------- JUDGMENT 24th August, 2011