IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civl Writ Petition No.8590 of 2011 Date of Decision : May 16, 2011. Vodafone Essar South Ltd. .....Petitioner versus Regional Provident Fund, Punjab & UT of Chandigarh and another .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Atul Lakhanpal, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Akshay Bhan, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioner-Company seeks quashing of the notice dated 10.5.2011 (Annexure P-7) whereby it has been called to pay a sum of Rs.15,33,35,956/- as arrears of provident fund, failing which it has been threatened with coercive action. The above stated notice has been issued for non-compliance of an order dated 22.4.2011 (Annexure P-4) passed under Section 7-A of the Employees Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provision Act, 1952. The petitioner's grievance is that the above-stated order has been conveyed vide memo dated 4.5.2011 which was received by it on 9.5.2011. However, CWP No.8590 of 2011 [2] without giving any breathing time to file appeal/review against that order, the impugned notice has been issued. It is contended that by taking coercive action, namely, attachment of the bank account of the petitioner-company, the right to appeal or review provided under the Statute is sought to be jeopardized. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the considered view that no case to interfere with the impugned notice by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction is made out especially when the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy of appeal/review against the impugned order dated 22.4.2011. However, with a view to enable the petitioner-company to file an appeal or review, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the accounts of the petitioner-company be not attached till 20.5.2011. The ad-interim stay application, if any moved by the petitioner-company with its appeal/review, shall be taken up for hearing by the Appellate or Reviewing Authority as the case may be, as early as possible and preferably on 23/24.5.2011. This order, however, shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the petitioner's case. Dasti. May 16, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE