Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J. - (1.) THE petitioners in this WP under art.226 dated November 19, 2010 are questioning an order of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner -II dated October 6, 2010(WP p.58) withdrawing the relaxation granted under para.79 of the Employees' Provident Funds Scheme, 1952. In para.4 of the WP it has been stated that since the benefits under its own rules were more beneficial, the establishment was granted relaxation under para.79 of the Scheme in 1952. In para.5 of the WP it has been stated that an application for final exemption under s.17(1)(a) of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 was submitted on July 20, 2007.
(2.) PARAGRAPH 79 of the Scheme is as follows: - 79. Special provisions relating to factories and other establishments in respect of which applications for exemption are received. -Notwithstanding anything contained in this Scheme, the Commissioner may, in relation to a factory or other establishment in respect of which an application for exemption under section 17 of the Act has been received, relax pending the disposal of the application the provisions of this Scheme in such manner as he may direct. An Affidavit -in -Opposition (in short AO) dated May 3, 2011 has been filed by an Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner. No material has been produced therewith. Neither the petitioners nor the respondents have produced the application filed by the establishment seeking exemption under s.17(1)(a) of the Act, the application seeking relaxation under para.79 of the Scheme, and the order of relaxation.
(3.) MR . Ali appearing for the petitioners has strenuously argued that it was for the Commissioner alleging breach of the terms and conditions of the relaxation to produce the order of relaxation and show which term or condition the petitioners violated.;