Pushpagiri Medical College … vs The Assistant Provident Fund on 23 October, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 20229 of 2007(G)


1. PUSHPAGIRI MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, SOUTH INDIAN BANK

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW

                For Respondent  :SRI.N.N. SUGUNAPALAN, SC, P.F.

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :23/10/2009

 O R D E R
                             S. Siri Jagan, J.
               =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                      W. P (C) No. 20229 of 2007
               =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                 Dated this, the 23rd October, 2009.

                            J U D G M E N T

The petitioner has filed this writ petition with the grievance that

before the period prescribed for filing an application for review under

Section 7B of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous

Provisions Act has expired, coercive proceedings have been initiated

to enforce Ext. P2 order passed under Section 7A of the Act. Interim

orders have been passed by this Court staying implementation of Ext.

P2 order on the petitioner paying Rs. 50 lakhs which has been paid.

Subsequently, the petitioner has produced Annexure I application

under Section 7B along with I.A.No. 9577/2007. The petitioner has

now filed I.A.No. 12884/2009 seeking stay of Exts. P5 and P6

proceedings initiated by the 1st respondent under Section 7C of the

Act in respect of the same order.

2. After hearing, I am inclined to direct the 1st respondent to

consider Annexure I and Exts.P5 and P6 proceedings together

expeditiously. But the earned counsel for the petitioner submits that

for effectively defending Exts.P5 and P6 proceedings , the petitioner

would require documents which have been seized by the 1st

respondent. The petitioner therefore seeks a direction to the 1st

respondent to to provide the petitioner with copies of those

documents. Learned counsel for the Provident Fund Organisation

submits that no request has been made in that behalf.

3. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the

following directions:

The 1st respondent shall consider Annexure I petition filed by

the petitioner under Section 7B of the Act and proceedings initiated

by Exts.P5 and P6 notices, together after an opportunity of being

heard to the petitioner, which shall include opportunity to adduce

W.P.C. No. 20229/07 -: 2 :-

evidence also. If the petitioner makes a request in that regard, the 1st

respondent shall furnish the petitioner with copies of documents

which are in the custody of the 1st respondent. Till final orders are

passed, further recovery proceedings for recovery of amounts

covered by Ext. 3 shall be kept in abeyance. The adjustment of the

amount deposited pursuant to the interim orders would be subject to

final orders to be passed in the above said proceedings .

Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge.

Tds/