AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sijbhash B. Adi
Smt. Sumangala A. Swamy, Learned Counsel is directed to take notice for respondent No.1. Since the relief sought for is only against respondent No.1, notice to respondent No.2 is dispensed with. The petitioner has called in question Annexure-B, an attachment order passed by the Employees Provident Fund Organization inter-alia at caching the bank accounts of the petitioner to the tune of Rs.50,81,426/- as arrears of provident fund interest and damages.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that, the main order itself is passed on 30.7.2012. The petitioner has got 60 days to file an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. However, within 30 days, an attachment order is issued and even to enable the petitioner to file an appeal at Delhi, it requires reasonable time. In the meanwhile, attachment order has been issued preventing the petitioner even from disbursing the salary.
Since there is a statutory period of 60 days for filing the appeal, the organization should have withheld itself till at least till the expiry of the 60 days. Nevertheless, having regard to the circumstances, I find that the petitioner would be permitted to file an appeal in a reasonable time. in the meanwhile, interim order may be granted. Accordingly, I pass the following
ORDER
Petition is partly allowed. Petitioner is at liberty to file statutory appeal before the Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal. In the meanwhile, operation of Annexure-B is stayed for a period of six weeks from today.
Smt. Sumangala A. Swamy, Learned Counsel for respondent No.1 is permitted to file vakalath within two weeks.