- (1.) This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 10.3.2000 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court, whereby and where under the writ application filed by the appellants herein was dismissed.
(2.) The fact of the matter shorn of all unnecessary details is as follows. A partnership business was started, wherefore a deed of partnership was executed in the year 1984. The partnership business related to printing and composing work. Admittedly, a statement of number of employees, workers and labourers from January 1986 to July 1998 had been filed, from a perusal whereof it appears that during all the periods, the number of employees was less than 20. However, the five partners of the partnership firm were also getting salary.
(3.) On or about 23.8.95, the said partnership business was converted into a private limited company. A proceeding under the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as the said Act) was initiated against the said company, and an assessment was made for the period 1984-95, inter alia, holding that there were 16 employees on the roll of the establishment, and keeping in view the fact that 5 partners had also been getting salary, the number of employees having exceeded 20, they were liable to pay provident fund in terms of the provisions of the said Act. The writ application was filed questioning the said order dated 28.5.99.;