IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH JANUARY 2011 / 15TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 35967 of 2010(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.S.SHANAVAS, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O. P.KUMARAN, PROPRIETOR, M/S. SREE PARVATHY CASHEW COMPANY, CHERUPOIKA, PAVITHRESWARAM, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.RAJA SRI.R.RANJITH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SCOPE MINAR, CORE II, IVTH FLOOR, LAKSHMI NAGAR DISTRICT CENTRE, NEW DELHI-92. 2. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, PROVIDENT FUND OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL COMMISSIONER. 3. THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EPF SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, OLD MUNICIPAL BUILDING, CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM. BY SRI.V.V.SURESH, SC FOR EPF ORG. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.35967 of 2010 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Ext.P7 order passed by the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, on 7.10.2010 directing the petitioner/appellant to deposit 30% of the amount determined in Ext.P2 order is under challenge in this writ petition. Ext.P3 is an appeal filed by the petitioner from Ext.P2 order passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner under section 7A of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 demanding the contribution payable by the petitioner to the Employees Provident Fund during the period from June 2003 to July 2007. The Appellate Tribunal held that though the petitioner has a prima facie case the petitioner should deposit 30% of the disputed amount for entertaining the appeal. The petitioner challenges the direction issued by the Tribunal to deposit 30% of the disputed amount as an onerous condition, which is incapable of performance. The petitioner also submits that the order impugned in the appeal was passed without affording the W.P(C).No.35967 of 2010 -:2:- petitioner a reasonable opportunity to substantiate his contentions and that the request made by the petitioner on 11.10.2007 for an opportunity to produce materials in support of his contentions was declined and an order was passed on the very same day. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in such circumstances there is every chance of the appeal being allowed, the order impugned being set aside and the matter being remitted to the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner. Learned counsel submits that in such circumstances the direction issued by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner to deposit 30% of the disputed amount may be modified. 2. I heard Sri.V.V.Suresh, the learned standing counsel appearing for the Employees Provident Fund Organization. I have also considered the pleadings and the materials on record. The Appellate Tribunal has in the impugned order taken note of the fact that the petitioner has a prima facie case warranting examination of the appeal in detail and directed the appellant to deposit 30% of the disputed amount within two months. While issuing that direction the Tribunal has taken note of the fact that the amount deposited will be used for the benefit of the workers. In my opinion in the light of the fact that the Appellate Tribunal W.P(C).No.35967 of 2010 -:3:- itself has come to the conclusion that the petitioner has a prima facie case warranting a detailed examination of the appeal, the Tribunal ought not have directed the petitioner to deposit 30% of the disputed amount. In my opinion, in the nature of the contentions raised in the memorandum of appeal, the Tribunal ought to have limited the deposit to 20% of the amount demanded in the order impugned in the appeal. I accordingly allow the writ petition and direct that in the event of the petitioner depositing with the 3rd respondent 20% of the amount demanded in Ext.P2 order within one month from today and producing proof of such payment before the Appellate Tribunal, the Appellate Tribunal shall hear and dispose of the appeal on the merits. In that event the order of stay passed by the Tribunal shall also continue to operate. The Tribunal shall hear and dispose of the appeal expeditiously and in any event within six months from today. P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge. ahg. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P(C).No.35967 of 2010 ---------------------------- JUDGMENT 5th January, 2011