Disposed

M/S.Prasanthi Cashew Ompany v. Employees Provident Fund Organisation

Kerala HC1 Apr 2008WP(C)/6990/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, an establishment under the Employees Provident Funds Act, challenged orders clubbing a new unit passed under Section 7A and seeking stay of recovery. After filing an appeal before the EPF Tribunal, the High Court stayed further coercive proceedings pending the Tribunal's interim orders.

What did the court decide?

Stay of all further coercive proceedings pursuant to the impugned orders till the EPF Tribunal passes orders on the interim prayers.

M/S.Prasanthi Cashew Ompany Vs Employees… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 1ST APRIL 2008 / 12TH CHAITHRA 1930

¶5

WP(C).No. 6990 of 2008(F)

¶6

------------------------PETITIONER:

¶7

--------------B.MOHANACHANDRAN NAIR ,PROPRIETOR M/S.PRASANTHI CASHEW COMPANY NO.21 PRASANTHI NAGAR, MANGAD P.O. KOLLAM DIST.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.ANIL NARAYANAN SMT.A.K.PREETHA

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

-------------------

¶11

1. EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION REGIONAL OFFICE,BHAVISHYA NIDHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004 REPRESENTED BY THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER.

¶12

2. THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION REGIONAL OFFICE,BHAVISHYA NIDHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN(SR.),SC EPF SMT.T.N.GIRIJA, SC,EPF ORGANISATION

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

S. SIRI JAGAN, J.

¶16

W.P.(C)No.6990 OF 2008

¶17

Dated this the 1^st day of April, 2008

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The petitioner is an establishment covered under the provisions of Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act. They opened a new unit at Bharathanoor as separate establishment. The 2^nd respondent passed orders clubbing the new establishment with the petitioner's other establishment and passed orders under Section 7A. Against the same, the petitioner has filed a review petition under Section 7B of the Act, in which they raised a specific contention that they were not served with a copy of the order of the Enforcement Officer, which was relied upon by the 2^nd respondent in the 7A order. However, the 2^nd respondent rejected the 7B application also. The petitioner has now filed Ext.P9 appeal before the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal. The petitioner now seeks stay of recovery of the amounts due under the impugned orders till disposal of the appeal.

¶20

I have heard the learned standing counsel appearing

¶21

W.P.(c)No.6990/08 2

¶22

for the Provident Fund Organisation also. Now that the petitioner has moved the Tribunal by filing Ext.P9 appeal and moved for interim orders also, it is only appropriate that further coercive proceedings pursuant to the impugned orders are stayed, until the Tribunal passes orders on the interim prayers made by the petitioner. Accordingly,the writ petition is disposed of as follows.

¶23

The Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi shall pass orders on Ext.P8 appeal filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. Till orders are so passed, further proceedings pursuant to the impugned orders in this writ petition shall be kept in abeyance.

¶24

S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

¶25

Acd

¶26

W.P.(c)No.6990/08 3

M/S.Prasanthi Cashew Ompany v. Employees Provident Fund Organisation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Prasanthi Cashew Ompany v. Employees Provident Fund Organisation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.Mc Dowell & Co. Ltd.,Cherthala Vs R.Mohan

K.C.Sony Vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.& Ors.

K.P.Sivanandan Vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.

Y.Thankamma Menon Vs the D.E.O.

E.K.Narayanan Vs the Recovery Officer,Debt Recovery

Jose.P.P. Vs Senior General Manager and Others