- (1.) Heard Sri J.N. Mathur, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Piyush Kumar Agarwal on behalf of petitioners, learned counsel for opposite parties and perused the record. With the consent of parties' counsel, the writ petition is being decided at the admission stage.
(2.) A preliminary objection has been raised by learned counsel for the respondents that against the impugned order dated 31.10.2013 as contained Annexure-1 to the writ petition, statutory appeal lies before the Tribunal under Section 7I of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. However, Sri J.N. Mathur, learned counsel for the petitioners refuted the argument of learned counsel for the respondents and submits that appeal is not maintainable, hence, the writ petitions may be entertained by this court. For convenience, section 7I of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, is reproduced as under: 7-I Appeals to Tribunal--(1) Any person aggrieved by a notification issued by the Central Government, or an order passed by the Central Government or any authority, under the proviso to sub-section (3), or sub-section (4) of section 1, or section 3, or sub-section (1) of section 7A, or section 7B [except an order rejecting an application for review referred to in sub-section (5) thereof], or section 7C, or section 14B, may prefer an appeal to a Tribunal against such notification or order. (2) Every appeal under sub-section (1) shall be filed in such form and manner, within such time and be accompanied by such fees, as may be prescribed.
(3.) A plain reading of the aforesaid provisions reveals that any person aggrieved by notification of the Central Government or any authorities under the provision of sub-section (3) or sub-section (4) of section 1 of section 7A or section 7B etc. may prefer an appeal before the Tribunal.;