RAMESH GOVINDBHAI HERMA Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule.Learned advocate Mr.P.J.Mehta, who is given an advance copy of the petition, waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondents.

(2.) In the present petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 21.11.2003 passed by the respondent No.1 in exercise of power under section 7-A of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions of the Act, 1952 ("the said Act" for short). It is the case of the petitioner that he is not required to pay any amount as his establishment is not covered under the provisions of the said Act. Despite this position, according to the advocate for the petitioner, respondent No.1 has issued the order dated 21.11.2003 and has also issued recovery certificate dated 15.4.2004 pursuant to the said order dated 21.11.2003.

(3.) Learned advocate Shri P.J.Mehta for the respondents submits that the order is appealable under the provisions of section 7-I of the said Act and the petitioner has not filed any such appeal. He also submits that the petitioner has not participated during the proceedings and that therefore also the petition should be dismissed. The petitioner, however, has stated in the petition that the petitioner had already given detailed explanation in the year 1995 and was under an impression that no further proceedings would survive.