- (1.) The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside order dated 23.10.2007 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bathinda, vide which application filed by Petitioner under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act') was dismissed.
(2.) I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully including the impugned order passed by learned trial Court.
(3.) Facts relevant for the decision of present revision petition are that Respondent No. 1-Plaintiff is running a clinic by employing more than 19 employees. List of employees as on 31.7.2006 alongwith coverage proforma was provided by Respondent No. 1-Plaintiff himself to the concerned Officer of Petitioner. Respondent No. 1 was also issued Code number vide letter dated 4.8.2006 by the office of Petitioner. As no acknowledgment was received from Respondent No. 1-Plaintiff, another letter dated 31.7.2006 was issued through registered post to Respondent No. 1 to produce the record. As Respondent No. 1 was employing more than 19 employees, he was covered under the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act'), as per the scheme framed under the Act and he was required to pay contribution at the prescribed rate under para 29 of the scheme, failing which the establishment is liable to pay damages under Section 14 of the Act. However, Respondent instead of depositing the provident fund dues, as prescribed under the Act filed the present suit challenging the order of present Petitioner, vide which Code number under the Act was allotted to him. Respondent No. 1-Plaintiff has sought decree for declaration to the effect that his clinic is not covered under the Act and that he is not liable to make any contribution or deposit the amount of his employees under the said Act and that the allotment of Code number by covering him under the Act vide letter dated 11.8.2006 is illegal and void.;