IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 01.03.2025 VEENA KASHYAP .....Petitioner VERSUS STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present : Mr. Kulwinder Bhargav, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Gaurav Goel, Advocate, for respondents no.1 and 2 KULDEEP TIWARI , J.(Oral)

1. Through the instant writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, a prayer is made for quashing of order dated 29.08.2023 (Annexure P-3), passed by respondent no.3, whereby respondent no.1 has been directed to create a lien on the account of the present petitioner to the extent of Rs.1,72,751/-.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia, in his endeavour to throw challenge to the impugned order (supra), submits that the petitioner through her counsel has served a legal notice dated 28.08.2024 (Annexure P-1), which was decided by respondent no.3, vide order (supra), without giving an opportunity of hearing and without disclosing that how come a recovery of an amount of Rs.1,72,751/-, is due towards the petitioner. Even the reply (Annexure P-2), to the legal notice does not voice about the same.

3. He further submits that a direction may be passed upon respondent no.3-EPFO, to reconsider the matter after giving an adequate opportunity of hearing to the present petitioner, to establish her claim before respondent no.3-EPFO.

4. On an advance notice, Mr. Gaurav Goel, Advocate, has caused appearance on behalf of respondents no.1 and 2, whereas, Mr. Tapan Masta, Advocate, appears on behalf of respondent no.4.

5. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties concerned, and has perused the entire case file.

6. Since an innocuous and a bona fide prayer has been made, for granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, enabling her to satisfy the contesting respondents no.3 and 4, about her claim, at this stage, without granting any opportunity to the contesting respondents to file the written statement, this Court deems it apt to pass a mandamus upon the respondents concerned, to reconsider the prayer, as made by the present petitioner in the legal notice (supra), and thereupon, to pass a speaking order after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, which shall also reflect the reasons for coming to the conclusion that the recovery is due towards the petitioner.

7. The aforesaid exercise shall be carried out within a period of 02 months from the date of passing of this order. Till then the lien created by the bank in pursuance of order dated 29.08.2023 (Annexure P-3), shall remain intact.

8. Disposed of accordingly.

(KULDEEP TIWARI)

March 01, 2025 JUDGE

dharamvir

Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No

Whether Reportable. : Yes/No