WPA/20947/2021 on 5 January, 2022

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

WPA/20947/2021 on 5 January, 2022

Bench: Suvra Ghosh

202
05.01.2022
 Ct. No.10
    b.das



                              WPA 20947 of 2021

                           (Via Video Conference)


                  Mr. Soumya Majumder
                  Ms. S. Dutta                    ...for the petitioner.

                  Mr. A. K. Gupta
                                           ...for the P.F. authority.

                  Learned counsel for the petitioner is aggrieved by the

             order of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II

             dated 30th November, 2021 directing the petitioner

             establishment to deposit the provident fund dues in

             respect of five employees within a stipulated period of

             time.

                  It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the

             five employees joined the petitioner establishment at a

             salary higher than the provident fund wage ceiling limit

             and were deemed to be excluded employees.                The

             petitioner had no obligation to deposit any contribution

             for the said employees.        The five employees were

             previously employed in a different establishment having

             no      connection    whatsoever   with     the   petitioner

             establishment.       The employees withdrew their entire

             subscription in the provident fund accounts before

             joining the petitioner establishment and as such the

             petitioner was not liable to deposit the provident fund

             dues in respect of the said employees.
                      2




    The       petitioner   further     submits   that     the

representation submitted by the petitioner before the

authority on 5th October, 2021 was not considered by the

authority in the proper perspective and the order

impugned was passed without due consideration of the

contention of the petitioner in the representation.

    In challenging the maintainability of the writ petition,

it is submitted on behalf of the respondents that the

impugned order is passed under Section 7A of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act read with para 26B of the Scheme which is appealable. There are several disputes of fact in the present matter, which cannot be adjudicated by this Court in its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Learned counsel for the respondents seeks accommodation to take further instructions in the matter. Let the matter appear under the same heading on 20th January, 2022.

(Suvra Ghosh, J.)

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)