IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2010 / 31ST ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 21292 of 2010(J) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ M/S.SREE DURGA CASHEW FACTORY, THEKKUMCHERRY, PUTHUR P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT, REP.BY ITS PROPRIETRIX, M.INDIRA BAI. BY ADV. SRI.R.ARUN, SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, OLD MUNICIPAL OFFICE BUILDING CHINNAKADA, KOLLAM. 2. THE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUNDS ORAGANISATION, MANNANIYYA COMPLEX, KOLLAM. *ADDL. R3 IMPLEADED ADDL.R3: THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CORE-2, 4TH FLOOR, SCOPE MINAR, LAXMI NAGAR, NEW DELHI-110 092. *ADDL. R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 22/07/2010 IN I.A.10058/2010. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.SURESH,SC,EPF.ORGANISATION. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/07/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. K. SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO: 21292 OF 2010 J ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd July, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner is the proprietrix of Messrs. Sree Durga Cashew Factory in Kollam district. She has filed this writ petition challenging Exts.P1 to P3 orders by which penal interest under Section 7Q and damages under Section 14B of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 has been imposed on the petitioner. When this writ petition came up for admission on 8/7/2010 an interim order directing the parties to maintain status quo for a period of two weeks was granted. The petitioner has produced additional documents Exts.P4 to P6 along with I.A.10004/2010 a petition to receive the said documents. The said petition has been allowed and the documents have been received. It is submitted that the petitioner has already filed appeals before the additional third respondent, which are Exts.P4 to P6. The said appeals are accompanied by separate petitions for stay also. Since the validity of Exts.P1 to P3 are pending consideration of the additional third respondent, it is sufficient that the said authority considers the same on the merits. WPC 21292/2010 2 2. In the above circumstances this writ petition is disposed of directing the additional third respondent to consider the stay petitions filed by the petitioner along with the appeals evidenced herein by Exts.P4 to P6 in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon as expeditiously as possible, at any rte within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Pending final orders on the stay petition as indicated above, all further action to enforce Exts.P1 to P3 orders or to recover the amounts demanded therein shall be kept in abeyance. K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj WPC 21292/2010 3