- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THIS writ petition arises out of proceedings under Section 7-A of Employees' provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions act, 1952 (E. P. F. Act) in respect of Mahabir singh Inter College, Ghaziabad (hereinafter referred to as 'the College') run and managed by petitioner, Committee of Management. Coverage notice was given to the College by e. P. F. Authorities for the period from January 1, 1996 to May 31, 2003 and it was directed to report compliance in the prescribed manner. The college did not accept the coverage notice and filed objection to the effect that it never employed 22 employees as stated in the coverage notice. The college was allotted Code no. UP/21234. The objections were filed by the college and thereupon proceedings were initiated under Section 7 A of the E. P. F. Act. In reply to further notice after registration of the case, it was stated on behalf of the College that it had not deducted any P. F. contribution from the salaries of its employees. The further case of the college was that at the relevant time there were two separate independent institutions, one was a Junior High School and the other a Higher secondary School and both were managed by different societies, hence both could not be clubbed, together. Ultimately matter under section 7- A of the Act was decided by regional Provident Fund (R. P. F.)Commissioner-II, Meerut through order dated february 27, 2004, copy of which is annexure-11 to the writ petition. In the said order, it is mentioned in fourth paragraph as follows: "finally on February 27, 2004, representative of the establishment agreed to comply with the Provisions of the Act w. e. f. January 1, 1996 but from the E. Os. report corporating the list of 33 employees duly signed by principal of the school on its letter head, it is found that Act is applicable to the establishment w. e. f. July 1, 1991. Sri bhardwaj argued that 7-A proceedings were initiated since January 1, 1996, hence establishment had objections in respect of coverage w. e. f. July 1, 1991. It is pertinent to mention here that the signature of the principal on the list of employees are confirmed by Sri N. K. Bhardwaj, representative of establishment. "
(3.) ULTIMATELY, the Commissioner held that the college was rightly covered under the Act and P. F. dues w. e. f. July 1, 1991 uptodate should be paid by it within 15 days. Review petition filed against the said order was rejected on March 15,2005. Thereafter appeal was filed by the college, which was registered as ATA no. 402 (14)/2005. E. P. F. Appellate Tribunal, new Delhi dismissed the appeal through judgment and order dated August 8, 2005, hence this writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the college/school in question is not covered under the Act as it does not employ more than 20 persons. In reply to this, argument of learned counsel for the respondents is that this point is no more open to the petitioners as before R. P. F. Commissioner, they conceded that they were liable to pay P. F. contribution as contained in the order dated february 27, 2004 quoted above. I agree with the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents. As contained in the above quoted portion of judgment of R. P. F. Commissioner, the school/college agreed to comply with the provisions of the Act. The only dispute raised by it was regarding the date since when compliance should be made. According to the college in question, it was required to comply with the provisions w. e. f. January 1, 1996. However, according to the respondents the college/ school was liable to comply with the provisions w. e. f. July 1, 1991. Accordingly, the said point, is no more open to the petitioners. Same argument raised before appellate authority was also not maintainable.;