IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.247 of 2011 In (CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE 17977/2010) The Board Of Trustees (Provide Versus The Union Of India & Ors ---------------------------------- For the appellants: Mr. Y. V. Giri, Sr. advocate Mr. R. P. Choudhary, advocate For the respondents no. 2 to 5: Mr. R. S. Pradhan, Sr. advocate Mr. Amarendra Nr. Rai, advocate For the respondent no.1: Mr. Raghib Ahshan Addl. S.G. ---------------------- 6 21-12-2011 An I.A. no. 8797/2011 has been preferred by the appellants for seeking amendment in the memorandum of appeal with a view to challenge the order dated 17-11-2011 available as annexure-A to the counter affidavit of respondents no. 2 to 5. By that order the Government of India in the Ministry of Labour and Employment has rejected the proposal for grant of exemption to the appellant Bank u/s 17 (1)(a) of the E.P.F & M.P. Act, 1952. From the materials on record and the submissions, it is clear that the appellant Bank had preferred the connected writ petition bearing CWJC no. 17977/2010 against an order of similar nature but passed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Bihar raising the ground that power and jurisdiction to 2 pass an order of such a nature rejecting claim for exemption lies with the Union of India. During the pendency of this appeal a direction was issued to the competent authority, the Union of India to consider the application of the appellant Bank made on 29-11-2010 for grant of exemption. Pursuant to such interlocutory order of Division Bench dated 24-02-2011, the order contained in annexure-A noticed above has been passed. The appellants want the legality and validity of that order be examined in this appeal. Since the writ court did not have any opportunity to apply its mind to the order passed by the Union of India as contained in annexure- A, we are of the view that appellants have a new cause of action and they should approach the writ court through a fresh writ petition, if so advised. With this liberty, this appeal is disposed of. It is made clear that in the light of earlier interim order dated 24-2-2011 whereby coercive action against the appellants was kept stayed till the decision of the competent authority and for one month 3 thereafter, we direct that for one month from today no coercive recovery shall be made from the appellant Bank. The recovery already made will be subject to the decision in the subsequent proceeding which the Bank may institute in accordance with law. Any further interim order will be as per discretion of the writ court. BKS/- (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Shivaji Pandey, J.)