Does a first charge under Section 11(2) of the EPF & MP Act prevail over the priority conferred by the SARFAESI Act's non-obstante clause?

Paragraph 3We also notice the decision of a Co-ordinate Bench in Jalgaon District Central Coop. Bank Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra and Others[^4] (authored by one us, KVC, J.), wherein the statutory charge, as created under the EPF & MP Act, was found to prevail over a non-obstante clause; overriding the provisions of any law in force at the time of the enactment. The statutory first charge under EPF & MP Act was found to override the non-obstante clause in the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) and we extract Paragraph 27 of the said decision as under: ‘27. Undisputedly, SARFAESI Act is the latter act and if the question was solely of the non-obstante clause giving it overriding effect from any law for the time being in force, the SARFAESI Act would prevail. However, in the EPF&MP Act, Section 11(2) creates a statutory first charge on the assets of the establishment for any amount due from an employer, be it the employers' or employees' contribution, which would include any interest or damages also as has been held in Maharashtra State Co-operative Bank Limited(2009) 10 SCC 123. In that circumstance, the effect of the non obstante clause giving precedence over any other law for the time being in force pales into insignificance, as held in Central Bank of India(2009) 4 SCC 94. There being a clear first charge created under the EPF&MP Act, it overrides the priority under Section 35 and Section 13 as also that conferred under Section 26-E since a priority cannot be equated with a first charge and cannot be given prevalence over the first charge statutorily created.’