1. Heard the learned Advocate, Mr.K.M.Patel, appearing on behalf of petitioners.
2. Learned advocate, Mr.Patel, submitted that from 23.4.2005 to 9.11.2006, in all, Rs.11 lacs have been paid by the petitioner No.1 to the respondent PF Authority against the claim of the department. However, due to financial difficulty, petitioner No.1 is not able to deposit further amount. However, liability as decided under Section 7A is not disputed by the petitioner No.1. The petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are having a HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Tue Jul 12 02:31:27 IST 2016 SCA/8233/2007 2/2 ORDER reasonable apprehension that respondent authority may issue warrant of arrest against them because property of petitioner Nos.2 and 3 has been attached by the respondent authority.
3. In light of this background, notice, returnable on 20.4.2007.
4. Meanwhile, ad-interim relief in terms of Para.7(b) till then. Direct service today is permitted.
(H.K.RATHOD,J.) (vipul) HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Tue Jul 12 02:31:27 IST 2016