B.D.A. v. Employees Provident
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner challenged attachment order under EPF Act. Court clarified earlier interim order modifying attachment and directed revised appearance date in 2019 for de novo assessment.
What did the court decide?
Modified appearance deadline in attachment order linked to EPF case and allowed cooperation in new assessment proceeding.
What the court decided
W.P.(C) No. 12931 of 2005
04 14.05.2019 Heard Mr. M.R. Pradhan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. D. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.K. Mishra, learned counsel for opposite parties no. 1 and 2.
The petitioner has filed this application to quash the order of attachment vide Annexure-7 series and further seeks for a direction to recover the said amount after receiving an attachment order by the competent authority.
On perusal of the record, it appears that the petitioner has filed an application against the order passed under EPF and MP Act, 1952. Admittedly, such order is appealable one. Since there is an attachment of the account of the petitioner, the petitioner immediately rushed to this Court and while entertaining this application, this Court passed an interim order on 18.10.2005 in misc. case no. 12919 of 2005 to the following effect:
“Heard
2. It appears that in consonance with the orders of assessment passed by the opposite party-E.P.F. authorities, a sum of Rs.1,16,30,000.00 has been attached from the account of the petitioner standing with opposite party no.3- Oriental Bank of Commerce. But then the said orders of assessment have already been quashed by this Court vide order dated 18.09.2002 in W.P.(C) No. 613 of 2002. Thus there was no order available on the basis of which the aforesaid amount of the petitioner could be attached. If the petitioner did not appear before the opposite partyauthorities or deposit any amount as directed by this Court as per the aforesaid order dated 18.09.2003 it was open to the opposite parties to proceed against it
and pass any fresh order of assessment. The order passed by this Court on 18-09-2003 was not a conditional one.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the order dated 18.10.2005 directed petitioner to appear by November 2005 when date has expired and thus should be modified to permit appearance by June 11, 2019
Whether petitioner can be directed to maintain fixed deposit with EPF authority
Whether attachment of EPF dues was legal after assessment order was quashed earlier
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Mr. D. Mohapatra
- respondent
Opposite Parties no. 1 and 2
- other
E.P.F. authorities
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court