JUDGMENT 1. By consent, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the time of admission itself. 2. Heard, Mr.T.P.Manoharan, learned counsel for the petitioner and also Mr.K.Ramu, learned standing counsel for the respondents Provident Fund Organisation. 3. The petitioner has come up with the present Writ Petition for a certiorari Mandamus, to call for the records relating to complaint bearing No. TN/SRO/IPC-406/409/PC-286/EO-Divn-I/2013 dated 24.06.2014 on the file of the 2nd Respondent and quash the same and consequently forbear the Respondents 1 & 2 from taking recovery actions under the Employees Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952 against the Petitioner till the disposal of its Application U/s.16(2) of the said Act dated 16.09.2013 by the 3rd Respondent. 4. After some elaborate arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner restricted the relief to the extent that the third respondent may be directed to pass appropriate orders on the application submitted by the petitioner under Section 16 (2) of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (in short 'Act') as expeditiously as possible. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that if the petitioner is allowed to sell the property, namely, attached Sugar, pending application under Section 16 (2), he is ready to pay a sum of Rs.2.5 cores to the respondents without prejudice to their contention. 5. The learned counsel for the respondent has no serious objection for the sale of the attached property provided if it is sold in the presence of the respondent officials, pending disposal of the 16(2) application, as only the petitioner has obtained injunction in WP.Nos.7417 and 7418 of 2014. 6. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, without going into the merits of the case, it is suffice to direct the third respondent to consider and dispose of the application filed by the petition under Section 16(2) of the Act on merits and in accordance with law, after giving notice to all parties concerned, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. However, since the petitioner has obtained an order of interim injunction restraining the respondents from proceeding with the recovery action by attaching the property in writ petitions in WP.Nos. 7. However, since the petitioner has obtained an order of interim injunction restraining the respondents from proceeding with the recovery action by attaching the property in writ petitions in WP.Nos. 7417 and 7418 of 2014, with the consent of the learned counsel on either side, the petitioner is permitted to sell the property in the presence of the respondents officials and thereafter, from and out of the sale proceeds, the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.2.5.crores to the respondent Provident Fund Organisation. It is made clear that the balance amount shall be decided by the respondents in the application submitted by the petitioner under Section 16(2) of the Act. It is needless to state that as the petitioner has given an undertaking that he is ready to deposit a sum of Rs.2.5. Crores from and out of the sale proceeds of the attached property, the respondent shall not take any coercive steps for the payment of the balance amount till the disposal of the application,which has been filed by the petitioner under Section 16(2) of the Act. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.