M/S AHAR Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. R. Karim, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. P.K. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 being the authorities in the Provident Fund Organization and Mr. M.R. Adhikary, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 being the Union of India.

(2.) The petitioners are the proprietors, functioning under the name M/s Ahar, M/s Ahar Hotel and M/s Aheli and they have their principle place of business at Sib-bari Road, Karimganj. The petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are represented by Mr. Nikhil Ranjan Mazumdar being the proprietor where as the petitioner No.3 is represented by Mr. Nirupam Majumdar being the son of Nikhil Ranjan Mazumdar, who projects himself to be the partner of the petitioner No.3.

(3.) What is noticeable is that all the three petitioners being M/s Ahar, M/s Ahar Hotel and M/s Aheli are all conducting their businesses from Sib-Bari Road, Karimganj and that the businesses are being conducted from one single premise. It is also noticed that in the proforma for coverage to be submitted by the employer under the Employees Provident Funds Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, the name of the establishment was shown as Aheli Restaurant, Ahar Restaurant and Ahar Hotel, where the respective functions are said to be of serving non-veg food, veg-food and lodging. The aforesaid information provided by the petitioner also gives an indication that all the three petitioners are in fact a part of one single establishment.