Rajiv Narain Raina, J.

1. Learned counsel for the respondent-Organization submits that there were two periods involved in this case with respect to assessment. The first period was from September 2004 to March 2005 which suffered an order under Section 7-A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 [for short the Act'] against which the petitioner is in appeal before the Employees' Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. Further proceedings against the School are stated to have been stayed in the pending appeal. The second period of assessment involves April 2005 to August 2009 which also has suffered an order under Section 7-A of the Act but which has not been appealed against by the Petitioner-School and is presently final. For the latter period supra proceedings under Section 14-B of the Act was taken out by the Organization to quantify damages which has led to the passing of the impugned order against which the present petition has been filed. The order under Section 14-B was passed on May 12, 2011. The petitioner had entered appearance and contested the case but for several dates including the day when the final order was passed, th