P.B. Bajanthri, J. - (1.) In the instant writ petition, the petitioner has questioned the validity of deduction of EPF amount from the petitioner-Society Contractor by the third respondent vide Annexure P-3.
(2.) The petitioner is a Registered Society registered as Vishkarma Indergarh Co-operative Labour and Construction Society Limited under the Cooperative Societies Act, 1952. The petitioner and the Markfed entered into an agreement. According to the agreement, petitioner-Contractor shall be responsible for arranging labour and guards for handling and transportation of foodgrains as per the requirement of the concerned District Manager, Markfed, Ferozepur etc. While implementing the agreement, the petitioner Society raised certain bills with the Markfed-third respondent. The Markfed-third respondent while making payment to the petitioner deducted EPF amount. Such deduction is aggrieved by the petitioner- Society. Hence, the present petition.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner being a registered Society is exempted under Section 16 (1) of the EPF Act, which exempts a Cooperative Society if less than 50 persons. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner-Society consists of 25 members. Therefore the petitioner-Society is not covered by EPF Act. Thus, deduction of EPF amount by the Markfed-third respondent is without authority of law. It was further submitted that on 30.11.2007 vide Annexure P-4, RPF Commissioner has issued a communication while confirming that the petitioner Vishkarma Indergarh Co-operative Labour and Construction Society Limited is not covered under the EPF and MP Act, 1952 with the EPF Department as per the office record. Therefore, the petitioner-Society is already exempted by the EPF Department. Consequently, deduction of EPF amount by respondent No.3-Markfed is arbitrary and illegal. It was further contended that EPF Department have not determined the EPF amount under Section 7 A of the EPF Act. Thus, without notice and without hearing the petitioner, the Markfed-third respondent has deducted EPF amount. Hence, the impugned Annexure P-3 is liable to be set aside insofar as deduction of EPF amount.;