M/S.TASTY NUT INDUSTRIES v. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUNDS APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
The writ appeal is disposed of as above
Provisions considered
Judgment
Operative part
KURIAN JOSEPH & C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ.--------------------------------------------W.A. No.1733 of 2009 ----------------------------------------------Dated 13th August, 2009.J U D G M E N TKurian Joseph, J.Appellants are the writ petitioners in W.P.(C)No.19841/2009. They are aggrieved by the steps taken under Section 7A of the Employees' Provident Funds and MiscellaneousProvisions Act, 1952.According to the petitioners, at the stage of initiation of the proceedings, they had approached the Tribunal asper Ext.P3 appeal and Ext.P4 stay petition and both are pending before the Appellate Tribunal. In the meanwhile, the ProvidentFund Commissioner has proceeded with Section 7A enquiry and passed Ext.P6 order dated 19.5.2009 determining the liability. One of the main contentions taken by the appellants is that the Commissioner should have waited at least till the disposal of the appeal by the Tribunal. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the ground that Ext.P6 itself is appealable and hence granted liberty to move the Tribunal. Since Ext.P6 is in continuation of the proceedings already initiated, which is subject matter of Ext.P3 appeal, it is only appropriate that the appellants WA NO.1733/2009 2either amend the appeal memorandum or take a challenge separately on Ext.P6. It will be open to the appellants to move the Appellate Tribunal, bringing to the notice of the Tribunal the intervening developments. There will be a direction to the Tribunal to dispose of Ext.P3 appeal or appeals in case another appeal is filed against Ext.P6 expeditiously, at any rate within four months. In any case, orders on Ext.P4 interlocutory application for stay shall be passed within one month from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. In order to enable the appellants to work out the reliefs as above, further proceedings shall be deferred for a period of four months. The writ appeal is disposed of as above.KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE.C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE.tgs KURIAN JOSEPH & C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ.----------------------------------------------W.A. No.1733 of 2009----------------------------------------------J U D G M E N TDated 13th August, 2009.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The writ appeal is disposed of as above
Which court decided this case, and when?
Kerala High Court, on 13 Aug 2009. The bench was C T RAVIKUMAR.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.