Kerala High Court
The Trivandrum District Co-Operative ... vs The Assistant Provident Fund ... on 28 November, 2011
Author: S.Siri Jagan
Bench: S.Siri Jagan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE 2012/30TH JYAISHTA 1934
WP(C).No. 8960 of 2012 (T)
------------------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------------------
THE TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE WHOLESALE SOCIETY LTD.
NO.4
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR IN-CHARGE
PUTHENCHANDA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR
SMT.ANITHA RAVINDRAN
SMT.P.V.SOBHANA
SMT.V.BEENA
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------------------
1. THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER
THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION
REGIONAL OFFICE, KERALA, BHAVISHY ANIDHI BHAVAN
PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004.
2. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
NEW DELHI-110001.
3. THE CHIEF MANAGER,
STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, SASTHAMANGALAM BRANCH
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695010.
R1 BY ADVS. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.)
SMT.T.N.GIRIJA, SC, EPF ORGANISATION
R3 BY ADV. R.S. KALKURA, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
20-06-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
DCS
WP(C).No. 8960 of 2012 (T)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :-
EXT.P1 COPY OF THE ORODER NO.KR/1701/ENF-1(6)/2011 DATED 28.11.2011 OF
THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P2 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)NO. 2630/2012 DATED 1.2.2012.
EXT.P3 COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 10.3.2012.
EXT.P4 COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT EVIDENCING DESPATCH OF EXT.P3.
EXT.P5 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.KR/1701/ENF.1(6)2012 DATED 3.4.2012.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :- NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE
DCS
S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
==================
W.P.(C).No. 8960 of 2012
==================
Dated this the 20th day of June, 2012
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is a society registered under the Kerala Co- operative Societies Act, 1969. The 1st respondent passed Ext.P1 order under Section 7A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, assessing contributions due from the petitioner under the Act. The petitioner filed Ext.P3 statutory appeal. The petitioner also filed an application to dispense with pre-deposit of the amount demanded, along with the appeal. But before the Tribunal passed orders on the same, Ext.P5 recovery proceedings have been issued under Section 8F of the Act. It is under challenge in this writ petition. The petitioner seeks the following reliefs;
"i) issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction, calling for the records relating to Ext.P5 and quash the same;
ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction, commanding and compelling the 3rd respondent not to implement Ext.P5 and allow the petitioner to operate the account.
iii) to declare that Ext.P5 is illegal and unsustainable especially on account of the existence of Ext.P3 appeal and stay petition and that the 1st respondent is legally barred from implementing Ext.P1 till the final adjudication of Ext.P3 appeal and stay petition and that Ext.P5 is vitiated with illegalities and lack of competence hence unsustainable and liable only to be quashed."
2. I have heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Provident Fund Organization also.
w.p.c.8960/12 - : 2 :-
3. I am of opinion that the petitioner should be given a breathing time to get orders from the Tribunal on the interim application filed by the petitioner. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:
The 2nd respondent- Employees' Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, is directed to pass orders on the interim application for dispensing with pre-deposit of the amounts demanded, filed by the petitioner along with the appeal, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Till orders are passed on the interim application, further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P5 shall be kept in abeyance. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the Tribunal within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, failing which, the petitioner will not be entitled to the benefit of this judgment. It would be open to the Provident Fund Organization also to produce a copy of this judgment before the Tribunal.
Sd/-
sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
///True copy///
P.A. to Judge
w.p.c.8960/12 - : 3 :-