KUMAON MOTORS OWNERS UNION LTD Vs. RECOVERY OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is an employer as defined under Section 2 (e) of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (from hereinafter referred to as "Act"). The respondent authorities vide order dated 18.05.2018 has fixed a liability on the petitioner under Section 7A of the Act. This order was challenged by the employer in a review application under Section 7B of the Act before the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, who has rejected the review application of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has not mentioned the provision under which the review application has been filed, although Section 7B of the Act clearly provides for a review. Section 7B of the Act reads as under:-

(2.) Learned counsel for the respondents - Mr. D.S. Patni has very fairly submitted that the Act does provide for a remedy under Section 7B of the Act. This being the admitted position of law, even if the petitioner had not mentioned the provision under which he filed a review application, the reviewing authority ought to have considered the matter within the parameters of Section 7B of the Act and should not have rejected the review application of the petitioner by passing a telegraphic order, as has been done in the present case.

(3.) In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 20.07.2018 is hereby set aside. Let the reviewing authority consider the matter and pass a fresh order in accordance with law.