REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION Vs. EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUNDS APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case of appellant department is that the regular employees of the 2nd respondent establishment were being shown as apprentices, though they were performing regular duties and on an inspection being carried out, a demand of Rs. 1,50,071 was raised. This demand was assailed before the 1st respondent appellate tribunal. The appellate tribunal, on appreciation of material on record, including the documents, came to the conclusion that the workers alleged to be performing the regular duties were in fact apprentices and were those not covered by the provisions of The Employees Provisions Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The Department took the matter further by preferring a writ petition, which has been dismissed by the impugned order, dated 23.08.2012, by the learned Single Judge. The findings of the learned Single Judge are hereunder:

(2.) On hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we find no fault with the findings recorded by the learned Single Judge in paragraph 4, aforesaid. It is trite to say that the process of appointment of regular employees and apprentices are different and, it is on appreciation of documents, the appellate authority came to the conclusion that certain persons, who were sought to be treated as employees of the 2nd respondent establishment, were only apprentices. We thus find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. The writ appeal, accordingly, stands dismissed. No costs.