M/S.Chandra Cashew Factory vs The Employees Provident Funds on 23 December, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 38029 of 2010(C)


1. M/S.CHANDRA CASHEW FACTORY,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUNDS
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND

3. THE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.R.ARUN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

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

 Dated :23/12/2010

 O R D E R
                            C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J.
                         ----------------------------
                        W.P.(C)No.38029 of 2010
                         ----------------------------
                      Dated 23rd December, 2010

                                JUDGMENT

The grievance of the petitioner raised in this writ petition is

with respect to the action on the part of the assessing authority in taking

coercive steps to implement the order of assessment despite the

pendency of the appeal preferred against the assessment order under

section 7-I of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous

Provisions Act (for short `the Act’). The contention of the petitioner is

that against the order of assessment he has already preferred an appeal

along with interlocutory applications for staying the operation and

implementation of the assessment order and also for waiver of pre-

deposit contemplated under section 7-O of the Act. The appeal and the

said interlocutory applications are pending consideration before the first

respondent. It is in the said circumstances that the petitioner contends

that there is no justification on the part of respondents 2 and 3 to issue

Ext.P3 order. Ext.P3 is an order issued for the purpose of recovering the

interest under section 7-Q of the Act and damages under section 14-B of

the Act.

2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and also the learned standing counsel for respondents 2 and 3.

WP(C).No.38029/2010 2

3. Admittedly, the appeal preferred by the petitioner is

pending before the first respondent. It is also admitted that the

interlocutory applications praying for staying the operation of the

assessment order and for waiver of the pre-deposit are also pending. In

view of the said circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of as

hereunder:-

There will be a direction to the first respondent to take up

Ext.P4 appeal for consideration and subject to the orders thereunder

consider the interlocutory applications filed along with Ext.P4 appeal

praying for staying the assessment order as also waiver of the pre-

deposit. Till the appeal as also the interlocutory applications viz., Exts

P4 to P6 are taken up for consideration and till orders are passed on

Exts. P5 and P6, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive

steps pursuant to Ext.P3.

Sd/-

C.T.RAVIKUMAR
Judge

TKS

// True copy //
P.S. to Judge