M/S. ARBION INFRA SERVICES vs UNION OF INDIA - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 15936

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 15936

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
GOPINATH P., J
M/S. ARBION INFRA SERVICES – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 47360 OF 2025

Important Points

Recovery proceedings can be suspended pending an appeal when a substantial payment is made to the concerned authority.

Subject

Civil - Writ Petition

Act Referred

Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952: S.14B

Headnote

The petitioner challenged the recovery order by the Provident Fund authorities while an appeal under Section 14B of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, is pending. The Court determined recovery proceedings should be suspended pending the stay application, provided the petitioner pays Rs.15,00,000. The final ruling orders recovery proceedings be suspended subject to the payment condition.

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.A.K.PREETHA, SMT.DEVIKA MOHAN, SMT.RESHMA R.KRISHNAN
For the Respondents: SMT.M.A.BINDU, SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL

Table of Content
1. recovery proceedings during ongoing appeal. (Para 1)
2. hearing of counsel on behalf of respondent. (Para 2)
3. court's observation allowing suspension. (Para 3)
4. final ruling with payment condition. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the fact that, when an appeal against the determination of damages under Section 14B of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 1952 Act’), is pending before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, along with an application for stay, the Provident Fund authorities are proceeding to recover the amount by proceeding against the bank account of the petitioner.

2. Heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation.

3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation, I am of the view that, since the petitioner has already preferred an appeal against the order No.KR/KCH/27968/000/ Damages/2024-25, imposing damages under Section 14B of the 1952 Act, along with an application for stay, the recovery proceedings have to remain suspended till a decision is taken on the stay petition by the Appellate Authority, namely, the Central Government Industrial Tribunal. However, considerig the fact that the amount demanded as damages is Rs.66,56,665/-, I am of the opinion that this shall be subject to the condition that the petitioner pays a portion of the said amount, which shall be taken into account while considering the stay petition in the appeal filed against the order passed under of the 1952 Act.

4. Accordingly, this writ petition will stand disposed of, directing that till the stay petition in the appeal filed against the order No.KR/KCH/27968/000/Damages/2024- 25 is taken up and considered by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, the recovery proceedings against the petitioner shall remain suspended subject to the condition that the petitioner remits a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs only) towards the liability under the said order within a period of one month from today (05.03.2026). It is made clear that, while considering the stay petition, the Central Government Industrial Tribunal shall have due regard to the fact that an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- has been paid by the petitioner (if the petitioner produces proof of having remitted the said amount within the time specified above). The writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-