Santhosh Joseph vs The Asst.Provident Fund Commissioner on 23 July, 2007

[Cites 0, Cited by 2]

Kerala High Court

Santhosh Joseph vs The Asst.Provident Fund Commissioner on 23 July, 2007

Bench: S.Siri Jagan

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 22514 of 2007(E)


1. SANTHOSH JOSEPH, PUTHULLIL HOUSE,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. GEORGEKUTTY JOSEPH,

                        Vs



1. THE ASST.PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND

                For Petitioner  :SRI.RAMESH CHERIAN JOHN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :23/07/2007

 O R D E R
                        S.SIRI JAGAN,J
                  ================
                   W.P.(C).No.22514 of 2007
              ======================
               Dated this the 23rd day of July 2007


                          JUDGMENT

The petitioner claims to have sold his establishment, in spite of which the first respondent sought to recover damages from the petitioner for delay in payment of contributions under the Employment Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, even for the period subsequent to the date of transfer. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed an appeal and stay petition before the second respondent Tribunal. In spite of pendency of the appeal and the stay petition, the first respondent initiated recovery proceedings for recovery of the disputed amounts. The petitioner approached this Court and obtained Ext.P19 judgment whereby this Court suspended the coercive steps for recovery for a period of four months to enable the petitioner to move the application for stay before the Tribunal on condition that the petitioner pays an amount of Rs.25,000/- within three weeks. The petitioner submits that he has paid the said amount. However, even after four months the Tribunal has W.P.(C).No.22514/2007 2 not considered the stay application. In the above circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition for seeking following reliefs:-

i) "Revive and extend the stay granted by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.(C).No.3377/07 and direct the 2nd respondent to dispose off Ext.P18(A) after giving notice to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible.

ii) In the alternative issue a writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to keep in abeyance all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P15, till the disposal of Ext.P18 appeal."

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the Standing counsel for the Provident Fund Organisation. From Ext.P20 I find that after obtaining Ext.P19 judgment the petitioner had actually moved the Tribunal for hearing the stay application. It is also not in dispute before me that the petitioner has already paid the amount of Rs.25,000/- in compliance with Ext.P19 judgment. In the above circumstances I direct that further coercive proceedings for recovery of the balance amount shall be kept in abeyance till the second W.P.(C).No.22514/2007 3 respondent Tribunal passes orders on Ext.P18(a) stay application.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE dvs

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Kerala High Court