Judgment :- (1.) In the writ petition, the petitioner stated to be a charitable organization and a society carrying on philanthropic activities and registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, has challenged the order dated 9th August, 2005 passed in the proceedings conducted under Section 7-A of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, which was communicated to the petitioner on 12th August, 2005. (2.) It is submitted that after the said order was communicated, though not in proper form a representation in the form of review was filed on 22nd August, 2005 before the authorities. In the meantime, the respondents in alleged execution of the said order passed under 7-A proceedings attached the bank account of the petitioner submission is made that the respondents have acted illegally in attaching the Bank account during the pendency of the application for review. (3.) Mr. Mihir Kundu, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the application for review filed on 22nd August, 2005 was not in proper form and therefore cannot be considered. However, pursuant to a query. Mr. Kundu in his fairness submitted that during the pendency of the application for review the order of attachment was not proper. This Court appreciates the fair stand taken by Mr. Kundu. (4.) Moreover, in my view, the action of the respondents in attaching of the bank account is high handed improper and ex facie illegal as the time to file review application in proper form is yet to expire. The action of the respondents is definitely overzealous which has no legal sanction. (5.) Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to file review application in proper form within 26th September, 2005. If review application is filed, the respondent authorities shall dispose of the same within 26th October, 2005 after hearing the petitioner or its authorized representative and, thereafter by passing reasoned order within a week from the date of hearing. The reasoned order shall be communicated to the petitioner within a period of seven days from the date of such hearing. (6.) At the time of hearing the petitioner shall be at liberty to produce documents in support of its contentions and shall produce documents sought for by the authorities and the authorities in its reasoned order shall deal with the same. (6.) At the time of hearing the petitioner shall be at liberty to produce documents in support of its contentions and shall produce documents sought for by the authorities and the authorities in its reasoned order shall deal with the same. (7.) In view of the observations, the attachment order dated 30th August, 2005 being Annexure P-8 to the writ petition is set aside and quashed. (8.) However, if the petitioner fails to file the review application under Section 7-B of the Act, the respondent authorities are at liberty to take steps in accordance with law. (9.) I make it clear that I have not gone into the merits of the case and all the points are left open to be decided by the authorities. (10.) The writ application is, thus allowed. No order as to costs. Urgent xerox certified copy of this order be given to the appearing parties, if applied for on priority basis.