THE MANAGING DIRECTOR Vs. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been filed against the order of the learned single Judge, who while holding that the writ petition as filed is not maintainable without exhausting the alternative remedy, nonetheless went into the merits of the case and dismissed the writ petition.

(2.) On 31.05.2020, the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner viz., the second respondent passed an order under Section 7A of the Employees Provident Fund Act against the appellant. The assessment was made both for regular employees and for trainees. A review was filed under Section 7B of the Act by the appellant, which was also dismissed by the order dated 23.09.2013. The aforesaid order is reproduced hereunder:

(3.) Thereafter, a writ petition was filed in W.P.No.28363 of 2013 by the appellant. The learned single Judge after going into the merits exhaustively including the report submitted by the Enforcement Wing of the respondent, held that on merit, the appellant does not have a case. Incidentally, the learned single Judge also took note of the fact that no appeal has been filed. Challenging the same, the present appeal has been filed.