IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 4TH JULY 2011 / 13TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 17886 of 2011(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- M/S.SREE DURGA CASHEW FACTORY, KUNNATHOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT,KERALA STATE,REP.BY ITS PROPRIETRIX,M.INDIRA BAI,DURGAVIHAR, THEKKUMCHERRY,PUTHUR PO,KOLLAM DISTRICT,KERALA. BY ADV. SRI.R.ARUN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUNDS APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI 110001. 2. THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER,EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, PONNAMMA CHAMBERS-1, PARAMESWAR NAGAR, OPP.ARCHANA ARADHANA THEATRE, KOLLAM 691 001. 3. THE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER,EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUNDS ORGANISATION, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE,PONNAMMA CHAMBERS-1, PARAMESWAR NAGAR, OPP.ARCHANA-ARADHANA THEATRE, KOLLAM 691 001. BY SRI.V.V.SURESH, SC FOR EPF ORGANISATION THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No. 17886/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE 7A ORDER DATED 16.1.2009 EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE CHELLANS EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 9.5.2011 EXT.P5 : COPY OF PROCEEDINGS OF 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P6 : COPY OF OBJECTION DATED 1.6.2011 EXT.P7 : COPY OF PROCEEDINGS OF 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P8 : COPY OF ORDER OF 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 10.6.2011 EXT.P9 : COPY OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXT.P10 : COPY OF STAY PETITION EXT.P11 : COPY OF PETITION FOR WAIVING PRE-DEPOSIT RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE vps P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 17886 OF 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed mainly seeking an order directing the first respondent, the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi to pass orders on Ext.P10 application for stay and Ext.P11 application for waiver of pre-deposit stated to have been filed by the petitioner in Ext.P9 appeal wherein the petitioner has challenged Ext.P8 order passed by the second respondent levying damages under section 14B of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short). It is stated that though Ext.P9 appeal accompanied by Exts.P10 and P11 applications was filed within the period of limitation prescribed for filing the appeal, till date, the first respondent has not passed orders thereon and that even before the first respondent has taken up the applications for stay and waiver of the pre-deposit for consideration, respondents 2 and 3 have taken steps to recover the amount demanded as per Ext.P8. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks an order directing the Appellate Tribunal to pass orders on Exts.P10 and P11 applications after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard and a further direction to respondents 2 and 3 to await the outcome of Exts.P10 and P11 applications before enforcing the demand made in Ext.P8. 2. I heard Sri.Latheesh Sebastian, learned counsel appearing for WPC No.17886/2011 2 the petitioner and Sri.V.V.Suresh, learned standing counsel appearing for the Employees Provident Fund Organisation. In the nature of the order that I propose to pass, I do not deem it necessary to issue notice to and hear the first respondent. Shorn of details, the grievance voiced by the petitioner is that though challenging Ext.P8 order passed by the second respondent under section 14B of the Act, the petitioner has filed Ext.P9 appeal accompanied by Ext.P10 application for stay and Ext.P11 application for waiver of pre-deposit, respondents 2 and 3 are taking steps to recover the amount demanded as per Ext.P8, even before orders are passed by the Appellate Tribunal. Though the first respondent has not stated in the writ petition the date on which the appeal memorandum was filed, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted with reference to the postal acknowledgment card that it was received in the office of the Appellate Tribunal on 28.6.2011. The learned counsel submitted that the period of limitation for filing the appeal is 60 days from the date of the order appealed against, that the order impugned in Ext.P9 appeal was passed on 1.5.2011 and therefore the appeal which was received in the office of the Appellate Tribunal on 28.6.2011 is one filed within time. 3. The learned standing counsel appearing for the Employees Provident Fund Organisation very fairly submitted that the Employees WPC No.17886/2011 3 Provident Funds Organisation will await the orders to be passed by the Appellate Tribunal on Exts.P10 and P11 applications before proceeding to enforce the demand made in Ext.P8 in view of the fact that the petitioner has filed an appeal challenging the said order. In the light of the submissions made at the Bar by the learned counsel on either side, I dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: (I) The Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal shall take up Exts.P10 and P11 applications filed along with Ext.P9 appeal, if they have been received and pass appropriate orders thereon expeditiously and in any event within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment after affording the petitioner and the second respondent, who are parties to the appeal, an opportunity of being heard. (II) Till such time as orders are passed by the Appellate Tribunal on Exts.P10 and P11 interlocutory applications, the recovery proceedings pursuant to Ext.P8 shall be kept in abeyance. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps