ACME CO LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner is aggrieved by a notice dated January 16, 1989 and follow up action taken thereupon including a letter dated April 17,1989 and an apprehension of prosecution under the provisions of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (the Act).

(2.) The question that arises in this case is whether a firm of advocates is amenable to the provisions of the Act. Learned counsel for the Petitioner has drawn my attention to Section l(3)(b) of the Act, which reads as follows:-

(3.) On a plain reading of the above, it is clear that clause (b) postulates two situations, namely, (1) relating to an establishment employing twenty or more persons; and (2) a class of such establishment which the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify in this behalf.