The court has the discretion to grant relief by allowing the petitioner to pay outstanding amounts in installments and to operate the account for paying salaries and other expenses, considering the impact of the pandemic on the petitioner's business.

ORDER :

1. Heard Sri Palla Balu Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P. Rambhoopal Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

2. In the present Writ Petition, challenge is to the prohibitory order passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner-3rd respondent herein under Section 8B/8F(3) of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short ‘the Act’). By way of the impugned prohibitory order dated 20.12.2021, in exercise of powers conferred under Sections 8B/8F(3) of the Act, the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner-3rd respondent herein ordered the State Bank of India-4th respondent to pay sum of Rs.48,20,927/- standing to the credit of the petitioner herein.

3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the impugned action is highly illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable and contrary to the principles of natural justice. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that subsequent to the impugned prohibitory order, the petitioner herein made a representation to the 3rd respondent to unfreeze the bank account, so as to enable the petitioner to receive and pay the salaries to the employees. It is further submitted that the business of the petitioner got affected very badly because of the pandemic situation, due to Covid-19. It is further stated by the learned counsel that every month, the petitioner’s organisation has to pay the remuneration to its employees and the petitioner’s organisation has more than 100 employees.

4. On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents that the order impugned in the present Writ Petition is only a consequential order of prohibition, in pursuance of the order passed by the Provident Fund Authorities under provisions of Section 7A of the Act on 22.10.2021 and the petitioner herein has an effective alternative remedy of appeal under the provisions of the Act.

5. During the course of arguments, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that after receipt of the prohibitory orders, the petitioner herein has so far paid approximately Rs.16,00,000/- on 30.12.2021 to show the bona-fides. It is absolutely not in controversy that because of the pandemic situation due to Covid-19, a number of organisations got affected very badly and the said reality cannot be loss sight of.

6. Having regard to the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, that after receipt of the impugned prohibitory order, the petitioner herein has already paid a sum of Rs.16,00,000/- this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition, granting 6 equal monthly instalments to the petitioner herein for clearing the entire outstanding amounts. It is also made clear that the said instalments shall be paid on or before 10th of every month, commencing from February, 2022. It is further made clear that in the event of non adherence to the same, the respondent authorities are entitled to proceed in accordance with law. It is made clear that if the petitioner herein adheres to the said arrangements, the respondent authorities shall not take any coercive action pursuant to the impugned prohibitory order. It is also made clear that the petitioner herein is entitled to operate his account to the extent of payment of salaries to the employees and other incidental expenses, if any, till the entire balance amount is paid. There shall be no order as to costs.

7. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.