Order At the outset, Mr. Sachin Kumar, the learning counsel appearing for the Jharkhand State Housing Board submits that in prayer under Clause (ii) at page-3 of the writ petition, the date of review order has wrongly been mentioned and therefore, he may be permitted to correct the same. 2. Permission is accorded. 3. Aggrieved by order dated 27.04.2012 directing the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board to deposit an amount of Rs.22,29,361/-for the period between March, 2007 to February, 2010 with interest and other administrative charges amounting to Rs.11,67,007/-and order dated 26.06.2012 whereby, the application seeking review of order dated 27.04.2012 has been dismissed, the present writ petition has been filed. 4. The brief facts of the case are that, a notice dated 06.05.2010 was issued to the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board for payment under Section 17 of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 and, in response thereof, the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board furnished details of payment vide letter dated 04.08.2010. The petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board furnished further details on 17.08.2010 and in response to letter dated 13.01.2011 issued by Accounts Officer of the Employees' Provident Fund Organization, the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board furnished details vide letters dated 19.01.2011 and 17.06.2011. It is stated that an enquiry under Section 7(A) of the Act was initiated in which the matter was heard on 06.07.2010, 05.08.2010, 19.08.2010 and 15.09.2010. The Enforcement Officer thereafter, submitted a report on 24.04.2012 and order under Section 7(A) of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 was passed on 27.04.2012 directing the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board to make the abovementioned payments. The review application preferred by the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board was dismissed vide order dated 26.06.2012. Aggrieved, the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. 5. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent-Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner stating that on the basis of the Enforcement Officer's report dated 24.04.2012, order under Section 7(A) of the Act was passed on 27.04.2012. It is stated that after the report was submitted by the Enforcement Officer, the case was reserved for orders on 24.04.2012. The petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board submitted revised return but, the discrepancies remained and therefore, a liability for payment of Rs.22,29,361/with interest under Section 7(Q) of the Act amounting to Rs.11,67,007/has been calculated against the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board. 6. It is stated that after the report was submitted by the Enforcement Officer, the case was reserved for orders on 24.04.2012. The petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board submitted revised return but, the discrepancies remained and therefore, a liability for payment of Rs.22,29,361/with interest under Section 7(Q) of the Act amounting to Rs.11,67,007/has been calculated against the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board. 6. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents on record. 7. Mr. Sachin Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board refers to various communications by the petitioner through which details of payment made by the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board under the Act were supplied to the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Ranchi. From order dated 24.07.2012 it appears that a report was submitted on 24.04.2012 however, a copy of which was not furnished to the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board and only on the basis of the enquiry report, the liability upon the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board has been fixed vide order dated 27.04.2012. It is further submitted that order dated 26.06.2012 declining to review order under Section 7(A) of the Act is apparently erroneous in as much as, the review petition has been dismissed on the ground that no new fact/evidence was brought by the establishment on record whereas, the specific stand taken by the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board is that order dated 27.04.2012 suffers from serious errors of record. 8. As against the above, Mr. Prashant Pallav, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Ranchi reiterates the stand taken in the counter-affidavit and submits that sufficient opportunity was afforded to the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board, which is apparent from the communication of the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board itself. The matter was heard on as many as four occasions and after considering the materials produced by the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board, order under Section 7(A) of the Act was passed on 27.04.2012. Supporting the review order dated 26.06.2012, the learned counsel for the respondent-RPFC submits that additional material was not produced by the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board and therefore, the review petition of the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board was rightly dismissed vide order dated 26.06.2012. 9. From the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent-RPFC, it appears that after the report was received on 24.04.2012, the case was reserved for orders. 9. From the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent-RPFC, it appears that after the report was received on 24.04.2012, the case was reserved for orders. From the impugned order dated 27.04.2012, it appears that the case was heard lastly on 15.09.2010. No further date of hearing has been indicated either in order dated 27.04.2012 or in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent-RPFC. It is apparent from order dated 27.04.2012 that after 15.09.2010, the matter was not heard though, a report was submitted by the Enforcement Officer on 24.04.2012. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that without supplying a copy of enquiry report and without hearing the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board, impugned order dated 27.04.2012 has been passed. The contention raised on behalf of the Jharkhand State Housing Board has not been disputed by the respondent-RPFC in as much as, it has not been brought on record that the case was heard on 24.04.2012 or a copy of enquiry report by the Enforcement Officer was furnished to the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board on 24.04.2012. From the pleadings on record, it appears that the liability on the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board has been fixed on the basis of the enquiry report dated 24.04.2012 and therefore, I am of the opinion that since the impugned order dated 27.04.2012 entails serious consequences to the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board, in as much as, a huge liability of Rs.22,29,361/with interest amounting to Rs.11,67,007/has been fastened on the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board and therefore, the respondent-RPFC was under a duty to furnish a copy of enquiry report dated 24.04.2012. A copy of enquiry report should have been furnished to the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board and the Board should have been afforded an opportunity to submit its objection, if any, to the enquiry report dated 24.04.2012. It further appears that in the present writ petition, the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board has taken a specific plea that though several discrepancies crept in the enquiry report dated 24.04.2012 in as much as, various payments made by the petitioner through cheques have not been considered in the enquiry report however, the review petition preferred by the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board has been erroneously dismissed vide order dated 26.06.2012. 10. 10. Considering the above facts, the impugned order dated 27.04.2012 and 26.06.2012 are hereby quashed and the matter is remitted back to the respondent no.2 for determination of the liability of the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board, if any, in accordance with law. It is further ordered that the respondent no.2 shall furnish a copy of the enquiry report dated 24.04.2012 to the petitioner-Jharkhand State Housing Board and the petitioner shall be afforded four weeks' time for filing its objection, if any, to the enquiry report dated 24.04.2012. 11. This writ petition stands allowed, with the above directions.