- (1.) The judgment of the Court was as follows :- The petitioners in this WP under Article 226 of the Constitution of India dated July 29, 2005 are questioning an order dated June 9, 2005 (WP p. 368) passed under Section 7B of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.
(2.) Proceedings under Section 7A were initiated against the petitioners for determining their liability under the Act. The petitioners participated in the proceedings. The authority concerned passed the final order dated April 22, 2005 (WP p. 97) holding that the petitioners were liable to pay the amount mentioned in the order. The authority passing the Section 7A order said and held, inter alia, as follows: "The findings of the Department together with relevant records/documents so far collected by the Enforcement Officers were presented before the Authorized Representatives of the establishment during the course of proceedings for the purpose of affording reasonable opportunity to the establishment in submission of its written brief as to why the Provident Fund dues will not be assessed on the wages paid to the seasonal workers and on labour charges paid to the temporary/casual/contract Labours engaged by the establishment as and when required. The proceeding was adjourned and finally came up for hearing on 19.04.2005."
(3.) Feeling aggrieved by the Section 7A order dated April 22, 2005 the petitioners submitted an application dated June 2, 2005 (WP pp. 105-121) under Section 7B of the Act. Sub-section (1) of Section 7B of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 is quoted below:- "(1) Any person aggrieved by an order made under sub-section (1) of Section 7A, but from which no appeal has been preferred under this Act, and who, from the discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of due diligence was not within his knowledge or could not be produced by him at the time when the order was made, or on account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record or for any other sufficient reason, desires to obtain a review of such order may apply for a review of that order to the officer who passed the order: Provided that such officer may also on his own motion review his order if he is satisfied that it is necessary so to do on any such ground." Paragraphs 11-15 of the Section 7B application are quoted below :-- "11. Your Petitioner states that on 19th April, 2005 the Company submitted its written objection. A copy of the said written objection is annexed hereto and marked as Annexure-C. 12. Your Petitioner states that on 19.04.2005 after the submission of written objection by the representative of the Petitioner Company, the authority was asked to leave without giving any opportunity to put up the case. 13. Your Petitioner states that no copy of the Report furnished by the Officers of the Visiting Squad was handed over to the representative of the Petitioner Company nor any opportunity was afforded to cross examine the said Officers of the Visiting Squad of which reliance was placed by the authority. 14. Your Petitioner states that as per paragraph 26B of the Employees' Provident Fund Scheme, 1952 if any question arises as to whether the person is required to become member then the person concerned would be required to be heard but no hearing was granted to any person who has been sought to be covered within the scope and ambit of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. 15. Your Petitioner States that the representative of the Petitioner Company wanted to produce the owner of the job centre who have been treated as Contractor but the said prayer has been rejected.";