ORDER :

All the respondents are represented.

2. The writ petition has been filed against a notice issued by the respondent No.2-The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner dated 22.11.2024 for the petitioner to show-cause as to why a warrant of arrest should not be issued against the petitioner.

3. The impugned notice has been issued under sections 7A, 7Q and 14B of The Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (EPF Act). The petitioner was asked to appear before the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner on 16.12.2024 at 02:30 p.m.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the impugned notice emanates from the fact of the petitioner company being closed in 2013 and the management of the petitioner company entered into a Memorandum of Settlement with the workers on 30.06.2014 whereby the management agreed to pay full compensation to the workers from 01.09.2013 to 30.11.2013 as well as the statutory benefits. The Settlement involved other issues which would appear from the Memorandum.

5. Counsel submits that certain sums were paid to the workers on various dates up to August, 2013. Counsel submits that the respondents/Provident Fund Authorities h