High Court Kerala High Court

Metro Silks vs The Enforcement Officer on 28 October, 2010

Kerala High Court
Metro Silks vs The Enforcement Officer on 28 October, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 28355 of 2010(T)


1. METRO SILKS, SAREES & READYMADE,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER,EMPLOYEES
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND

3. THE EPF APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,4TH FLOOR,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.N.RAGHURAJ

                For Respondent  :SRI.S.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR (SR.)

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.T.RAVIKUMAR

 Dated :28/10/2010

 O R D E R
                           C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J.
                        ----------------------------
                       W.P.(C)No.28355 of 2010
                        ----------------------------
                       Dated 28th October, 2010

                               JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the Managing Partner of M/s.Metro Silks,

Sarees & Readymade, North Chalakkudy. The provisions of the

Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (in

short `the Act’) and the Scheme thereunder are made applicable to the

petitioner company. Since the petitioner has failed to effect contribution

promptly a notice under section 7A of the Act was issued to the

petitioner and thereafter Ext.P1 order dated 9.6.2009 was passed.

Pursuant to the same, Ext.P5 demand notice was issued and that was

followed by Ext.P6 notice for attachment. Feeling aggrieved by Ext.P1

order, the petitioner has preferred an appeal under section 7(1) of the

Act before the third respondent. In the said circumstances,

apprehending coercive steps pursuant to Exts.P1, P5 and P6 that this

writ petition has been filed.

2. When this matter is taken up today, the learned counsel

for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is confining his prayers to

one for a direction to the first respondent to keep in abeyance all

coercive steps and permit the petitioner to pay the amount covered as

per Ext.P1 together with the interest thereon in instalments.

3. I have heard the learned standing counsel appearing for

respondents 1 and 2 as well. In the light of the said submission made on

WP(C).No.28355/2010 2

behalf of the petitioner, I am inclined to dispose of this writ petition as

hereunder:-

The first respondent shall keep in abeyance all coercive steps

taken pursuant to Ext.P1 order in such a way to enable the petitioner to

pay the amount covered as per Ext.P1 together with interest thereon as

specified in Ext.P6, in six equal monthly instalments commencing from

15th day of November, 2010. The subsequent instalments shall be paid

by the petitioner on or before the 15th day of every succeeding month till

the entire amount due is wiped off. It is made clear that in case the

petitioner fails to pay the amount in terms of the directions in this

judgment, it will be open to the first respondent to proceed with the

steps taken as per Exts.P5 and P6. The learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that this judgment shall not be worked out to the prejudice of

the petitioner in challenging the proceedings that may follow by virtue of

the provisions under Sections 7Q and 14B of the Act. it is made clear

that this judgment and the payments effected in terms of this judgment

shall not affect the rights of the petitioner otherwise available to defend

any such proceedings.

C.T.RAVIKUMAR
Judge

TKS