LAWS(GJH)-2022-4-877

LAXMI NARAYANA CONTRACTORS Vs. ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER

Decided On April 11, 2022
Laxmi Narayana Contractors Appellant
V/S
ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Krutarth Desai, learned advocate for the petitioner and Ms. E. Shailaja, learned advocate for the respondent.

(2.) By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction that an appropriate writ be issued to the respondent to initiate de novo inquiry under the provisions of Sec. 7A of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act , 1952.

(3.) Mr. Krutarth Desai, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner would submit that if the order under Sec. 7A of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act , 1952 (for short 'the Act') is perused, it was an ex-parte order inasmuch as the petitioner was deprived of an opportunity to appear before the Assistant Commissioner, Provident Fund, Surat. Aggrieved by the order under Sec. 7A of the Act dtd. 29/5/2008, Mr. Desai would submit that on 15/6/2008 the petitioner preferred an application for review of the order. One of the grounds for seeking review was that report of one Shri S.P. Shrimali based on which the order was passed, copy of the report was not supplied. That the order was ex-parte was also assailed on the ground that as early as in the year 1995, the employer had informed the authorities of change of address. Realising that the review was not in the prescribed format as in Form 9 of the Act, a fresh application for review was filed on 10/9/2008 which according to Mr. Desai was rejected on 19/9/2008 on the ground of it not being in the format prescribed. He would invite the court's attention to the order dtd. 19/9/2008 (page 20 of the paperbook).