https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105498 Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 bars coercive recovery only where proceedings would impede a sick company's revival process, and it does not extend to recovery of employees' provident fund contributions deducted from wages and unlawfully retained by the employer. The court noted that such statutory dues belong to workers and form part of the social security regime under the provident fund law, while the limited protection referred to in that law concerns damages, not the principal contributions. Recovery of these dues was therefore held not to frustrate rehabilitation, and the writ challenge to the attachment proceedings failed. en-us Tue, 14 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Mar 2012 18:21:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105498 Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 bars coercive recovery only where proceedings would impede a sick company's revival process, and it does not extend to recovery of employees' provident fund contributions deducted from wages and unlawfully retained by the employer. The court noted that such statutory dues belong to workers and form part of the social security regime under the provident fund law, while the limited protection referred to in that law concerns damages, not the principal contributions. Recovery of these dues was therefore held not to frustrate rehabilitation, and the writ challenge to the attachment proceedings failed. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 14 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105498