SRI. M.K. JOHN, PROPRIETOR Vs. ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is by the writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 23584 of 2011 against the judgment dated 31.8.2011 of the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition.

(2.) The short facts of the case are summarized as follows:

(3.) It was contended that Exts. P3 and P7 were arbitrary, ultra vires and liable to be set aside. The contentions of the appellant were refuted by the first respondent. After considering the contentions, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition finding that, since the establishment had employed more than 20 workers at one point of time, in view of Section 1(3) and (5) of the Act the coverage would continue though the number of employees may have dropped, at some later point of time. It is aggrieved by the said judgment that this appeal is filed.