VENUGOPALA REDDY M Vs. HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, the petitioner is a contractor. He is seeking to quash Annexure-A dated july 17, 1998 by which the petitioner was called upon to furnish his own and E. S. I. and P. P. Code numbers to consider his request for issue of tender document. It is contended that inspite of 2nd respondent confirming that such separate code numbers are not required, the condition is imposed and the same is violative of Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India. It is further contended that refusal to give tender forms for non-furnishing separate code numbers is violative of principles of natural justice as no opportunity was given to the petitioner. It is also contended that the imposition of the condition is contrary to Section 30 of the Employees Provident Fund act.

(2.) RESPONDENTS 1 and 2 have filed their respective counters. The main stand taken by the first respondent is that it has been exempted from extending the statutory benefits to contract workers under Para 27-A of the Employees Provident Fund Scheme as per Annexure-R2 dated April 24, 1990.

(3.) IN paragraph 4 of the counter filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent it is stated that all these years the first respondent was deducting Provident Fund contributions in respect of contract employees and was remitting the same to the Fund. For the first time the first respondent has called upon the petitioner to obtain Separate Code Number, which is not permissible under the act or the Scheme. The first respondent is estopped from directing the petitioner to obtain separate code number, especially when the first respondent itself was complying with the provisions of the Act in respect of employees engaged through contractors. The procedure to be followed in the matter is elaborately stated in paragraph 3 of the counter.