ABDUL KAREEM v. EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

S. Siri Jagan, J.=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=W. P (C) No. 27569 of 2009=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=Dated this, the 20th October, 2009.J U D G M E N TThe petitioner's is an establishment covered under the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act. Anorder has been passed under Section 7A of the Act directing thepetitioner to pay contributions under the Act. A review petition filedunder Section 7B by the petitioner has been rejected. The petitionerhas filed Ext. P1 appeal against that order. The petitioner apprehendscoercive recovery proceedings during the pendency of the appeal. The petitioner submits that the Tribunal is yet to consider thepetitioner's application for stay and dispensation of pre-deposit. Thepetitioner therefore seeks stay of recovery proceedings pendingdisposal of the appeal.

I have heard the learned standing counsel for the ProvidentFund Organisation also. He would submit that no coercive recoveryproceedings have yet been initiated against the petitioner. It isfurther submitted that the petitioner is bound to pay the amounts due. He also submits that even if this Court is inclined to exercise thediscretionary remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution, that maybe only on condition that the petitioner deposits substantial portion ofthe amount demanded as per the order impugned in Ext. P1 appeal.

Having heard both sides, I feel that it is only appropriate thatpending disposal of the appeal, the coercive recovery proceedingsbe kept in abeyance. But, that cannot be without any condition. Thepetitioner is bound to pay a portion of the amount demanded as acondition for stay of recovery proceedings . Accordingly, I dispose ofthe writ petition with the following directions: The Tribunal shall consider and pass orders on Ext. P1 appeal asexpeditiously as possible. Till the disposal of the appeal, coerciverecovery proceedings for recovery of the amount disputed by the W.P.C. No. 27569/09-: 2 :-petitioner in respect of the order impugned in the appeal shall be keptin abeyance on condition that the petitioner pays an amount of Rs. 3lakhs within one month from today. I also direct that this orderwould operate as dispensing with the requirement of pre-deposit ofthe amount covered by the impugned order, subject to payment of theamount of Rs. 3 lakhs as directed above. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/[True copy]P.S to Judge.