(1.) Petitioner No. 1 is the proprietor of a cinema hall situated in the town of Giridih in the district of Hazaribagh, which is known as the Moti Picture Palace. Petitioner No. 2 is his son and petitioner No. 3 is the Manager of the establishment. By Notification No. GSR 827 dated the 19th June, 1961, issued by the Central Government, cinema halls were also included in the class of establishments to which the Employees' Provident Funds Act, 1952 (Central Act XIX of 1952), hereinafter called the Act, applies.
(2.) The petitioners' case is that under mis-apprehension of the law and under some coercion, petitioner No. 1 submitted to the jurisdiction of the Act and the Employees' Provident Funds Scheme, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the scheme), framed thereunder, by depositing, on the 14th November, 1962, a sum of Rs. 96.50 Paise, towards provident fund contribution for the month of October, 1962. Lateron, on realising the correct position, he. made a representation to the then Regional Provident Fund Commissioner that the Act did not apply to his establishment. Respondent No. 1, on being satisfied about the correctness of the stand of petitioner No. 1, issued a letter dated the 19th July, 1963, a copy of which is Annexure '3' to the writ application, releasing the petitioners' establishment from the liability of the provident fund imposed under the Act. A certificate case filed for realisation of provident fund in respect of the period August, 1961, to September, 1962, was cancelled by the Certificate Officer, Hazaribagh, at the request of Respondent No. 1. In January, 1967, however, Respondent No. 1 issued a notice dated the 16th January, 1967, asking the establishment to appear before him on the 18th January, 1967, in connection with the enquiry to determine the amount due from the petitioners' establishment. The notice was received actually on the 19th January, 1967, at 2-30 P.M. It was impossible to comply with it on the 18th January, 1967. A reply was, accordingly, sent on the 23rd January, 1967. A copy of the notice dated 16th January, 1967, is Annexure '4' and that of the reply dated the 23rd January, 1967, is Annexure '5'. The petitioners' case further is that without giving any further or reasonable opportunity of representing their case, an amount of Rs. 8,106.00 was determined as the total of the employer and employees' contributions and administrative charges by Respondent No. 1, by his order dated the 20th October, 1967, a copy of which is Annexure '6'. Petitioner No. 1, thereafter, represented his case to the Central Provident Fund Commissioner, New Delhi, who, finally informed him by his letter dated the 23rd May, 1968, a copy of which is Annexure '7', that his establishment has rightly been covered under the Act with effect from the 31st July, 1961. A certificate case (No. 49 of 1968) has been filed before the Certificate Officer of Hazaribagh for realisation of the sum of Rs. 8521.79 Paise. A further notice dated the 4th June, 1968, has been issued asking petitioner No. 1 to attend the office of Respondent No. 1 on the 2nd July, 1968, in connection with the determination of the amount payable under the Act and the Scheme, for the period from September, 1967, to April, 1968.
(3.) The main contention put forward on behalf of the petitioners is that their establishment is not one to which the Act can apply. Hence the determination of the amount to the tune of Rs. 8,000.00 and odd or any amount for future is without any justification basis and is ultra vires. The further attack is that no reasonable opportunity was given to the petitioners to represent their case as required by Sub-section (3) of Section 7-A of the Act.