TELCO TRANSPORT COMPANIES ASSOCIATION Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application for early hearing of this writ petition on the ground that the respondents are suffering financial loss since they are not able to avail the amount deposited towards provident fund which is lying in deposit with the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Jamshedpur.

(2.) However, we have noticed that the matter initially had been listed before the Single Bench, but thereafter it was referred to the Division Bench by order dated 7.7.06 without assigning any reason as to why it should have been referred to the Division Bench in absence of any conflict of opinion between the two Benches or existence of conflicting judgments which under the rules could have justified referring the matter to the Division Bench. The only reason assigned in the order dated 7.7.06 for referring the matter to the Division Bench is that it involved the issue which required determination as to whether there is relationship of employer and employee for ensuring payment of provident fund under the Employees' Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provision Fund Act, 1952. The other question, as per the Single Bench, for determination was whether the matter could be remanded back for determination by appellate forum since the dispute is continuing for more than 25-30 years. Under these two circumstance, it was noticed that it was desirable to refer the matter before the Division Bench.

(3.) We do not, however, subscribe to the view that it was a fit case for referring the matter straightway to the Division Bench as the matters are referred from Single Bench to the Division Bench, inter alia, on the grounds including the ground that if the petitioner challenges the constitutional validity of an Act or provision of an Act or difference of opinion between the Judges on any issue or judgment or conflicting judgments are cited before the Single Bench which may justify reference of the matter straightway by the Single Bench to the Division Bench. In absence of any of these grounds, it is incumbent upon the Judge taking up the matter to decide the same as per his views.