It appears that the respondent; the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Vanchiyoor, Trivandrum, intimated to the appellant on March IO, 1953, that the Act as well as •he scheme framed under it were applicable to the appellant's factory, and so, the appellant was cal_led upon to deposit in the Sub-" Office of the Imperial Bank of India the contributions and administrative charges as required by s .. 6 of the Act. The same requisition was repeated on March 25, 1953 and April 24, 1953. The appellant disputed the correctness of the view taken by the respondent that the appellant's factory ·fell under the purview of the Act, and so, it refused to comply with the respondent's requisition. Thereupon, the respondent wrote to the appellant on June 16, 1953 informing it that appropriate action would be.taken to compel the appellant to make the necessary deposit · and submit returns as re<1uired by the Act in caSe it failed to comply with the notices issued in that behalf. At this stage, the appellant moved . the High Court of Kerala by a writ petition (0. P. No. 97 /1953) in which it claimed a writ of certiorari quashing the notices issued by the respondent against . it, and restraining the respondent from proceeding · . further in the matter and for other incidental reliefs.
