EXECUTIVE ENGINEER Vs. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. B.K. Pattanaik, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. S.K. Dash, learned Counsel for the R.P.F. Commissioner. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed in P.O. Case No. 164/2003 -2004 demanding damages of Rs. 84,297 under section 146 of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, hereinafter referred to as the 'E.P.F. Act'.

(2.) AT the outset, the attention of the Court was drawn to the provisions of section 7 -I of the EPF Act, which provides for appeals to Tribunal. Sub -section (1) of section 7 -I, it is provided that any person aggrieved by any notification of the Central Government, or order passed by the Central Government or any authority untfer the proviso to sub -section (3), or sub -section (4) of section 1, or section 3, or sub -section (1) of section 7 -A, or section 7 -B except an order rejecting an application for review referred to in sub -section (5) thereof, or section 7 -C, or. sections 14 -B may prefer an appeal to the Tribunal against such notification or order.

(3.) IN that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal to the Tribunal within 30 (thirty) days from today raising all such grievances/arguments raised in this writ petition. On such an event, the learned Appellate Tribunal, shall hear and dispose of the appeal, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of filing of the appeal. Till the final order is passed, if any, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner in pursuance of Annexure -3. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules. Petition Disposed Of