- (1.) In the instant writ petition, the petitioner has questioned the order dated 30.12.2008 and 17.08.2011, vide Annexures P4 and P6. The respondent-PF department made assessment and demanded for payment of PF, interest and damages on the petitioner.
(2.) Aggrieved by the same, preferred an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. On 17.08.2011, petitioner's appeal was rejected in ATA No. 120(II)/2009. Hence, this petition.
(3.) Petitioners engaged 3 trainees Assistant Engineer in the petitioners' Sugar Mill for a period of 3 years by paying them consolidated stipend of Rs.1800/Rs.2000 per month in the First, Second and Third year respectively. The petitioners' Sugar Mill is of the view that trainee appointees are not required to contribute provident fund. In this regard, petitioner suffered an order in the year 2007. Thereafter, the PF department assessed the PF amount and demanded the same. Respondent-Department is stated to have demanded PF, interest and damages. Insofar as damages under Section 14B of the Provident Fund Act, 1952 is concerned, it is questioned that the EPF Department kept quiet from 1990 to 2004.;