Telangana High Court
M/S.Viswa Vani vs Employees Provident Fund Organization on 18 July, 2022
Author: K.Lakshman
Bench: K.Lakshman
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN
WRIT PETITION No.15876 of 2021
ORDER:
Heard Sri. Patil Shankar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Dr.B.Manoj Kumar, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Corporation.
2. This Writ Petition is filed to declare the order passed by the respondent under section 7A of the Employees Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 dated 25.05.2021 as illegal.
3. Perusal of the record would reveal that the petitioner herein filed a statutory appeal challenging the order dated 25.05.2021 passed by the respondent Corporation under section 7A of the Employees Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. Along with the said Appeal, the petitioner herein has filed two (2) Interlocutory Applications, one seeking waiver of the condition of deposit of 75% of the amount and also to Stay of further proceedings pursuant to order dated 25.05.2021. 2
4. There is no Presiding Officer in the Provident Fund Tribunal. However, both the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondent Corporation submit that Presiding Officer of P.F Tribunal, Kerala is incharge for Provident Fund Tribunal at Hyderabad and he is not coming regularly, even monthly ones. However, the Provident Fund Tribunal at Hyderabad has allowed waiver application on the condition to deposit 40% of the amount within one (1) month. However, according to the learned counsel, the petitioner could not comply with the said order and filed an application seeking of time. The Tribunal is not taking up the said Extension Petition and the period was not extended. The Presiding Officer is not staying at Hyderabad. Online requisition to take up the said Extension Petition online was not considered by the Presiding Officer.
5. On the other hand, the respondent has freezed 19 accounts of the petitioner on different Banks on the ground that the Tribunal has not granted Stay. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 3 petitioner herein has filed Contempt Case. In view of the same, he further submits that the petitioner herein shall pursue the ATA including Extension Petition, Stay Petition and sought to close the Writ Petition without causing prejudice to his rights to the said Appeal.
6. Recording the said submissions, this Writ Petition is closed granting liberty to the petitioner herein to pursue Appeal, Waiver Application, Extension Application, Stay Application and also Contempt Application. However, the orders in the present Writ Petition will not come in the way of petitioner herein in pursuing contempt proceedings.
7. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed. No costs.
________________________ JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN Dt.18-07-2022.
krl 4 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.15876 of 2021 Dt.18.07.2022 krl