S.U.Khan, J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) Under Section 16 (1)(d) of Employees, Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as "E.P.F. Act"), it was provided that the Act should not apply to any establishment newly set up until the expiry of a period of three years from the date on which such establishment was, or had been, set up. (The said provision was omitted in the year 1998, however, it was very much there at the time when the controversy involved in this writ petition arose).
(3.) Under the aforesaid provision petitioner was granted exemption for three years for its new Unit known by the name of Forge Division through order dated 13.4.1981 passed by Provident Fund Inspector. (Copy of the said order is Annexure '2' to the writ petition). According to the said order manufacturing process had for the first time started on 23.3.1978 hence until 31.3.1981 provisions of the E.P.F. Act were not to apply to the said Unit. However, in para 2 of the said order it was provided that exemption was provisional subject to further verification of records. Thereafter through order dated 18.8.1981 (Annexure'9' to the writ petition), Sri S.K. Sarkar, acting for Regional Provident Fund Commissioner U.P. withdrew the earlier order. In the said order it is mentioned that earlier also on 22.7.1981 letter was sent to the petitioner to implement the provisions of E.P.F. Act with effect from 23.3.1981. It is also mentioned in the letter dated 18.8.1981 that "On further verification it has been found that the provisions of the aforesaid Act and schemes framed thereunder are applicable to above named Unit w.e.f. 1.3.1978 and not from 23.3.1981." Thereafter it appears that some review petition was filed by the petitioner and ultimately a detailed order was passed on 18.10.1985 by Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, U.P. which is contained in Annexure '21' and is challenged through this writ petition along with the order dated 18.8.1981.;