- (1.) HEARD Mr. S. Choudhary, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. P. P. N. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the 'Respondents. .
(2.) THE Petitioner, in the instant case, has prayed for quashing of Annexure 3, the order dated 19 -10 -1994 by which the Respondent No. 2 (Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner) has levied a sum of Rs. 1,87,019.00 as Provident Fund contribution in respect of employees employed with the Urusuline Hospital at Lohardaga. According to the Petitioner, the impugned order, apart from being an ex parte assessment, is also illegal inasmuch as it has incorrectly dealt with the main issue namely that the Nuns and Sisters who have taken a vow of poverty are not covered under the provisions of the Employees' Provident Fund (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred for the sake of brevity as the 'said Act '). According to Mr. S. Choudhary, learned counsel for the Petitioner, the aforementioned Hospital is a part of the Lohardaga Charitable Ursuline Society which is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act and it being a religious order, there is no relationship of employer and employee inter se amongst the aforementioned Sisters and Nuns and consequently they should not have been brought under the sweep of the said Act.
(3.) THE first point in relation to the impugned order being ex parte does not find favour with this Court inasmuch as from a perusal of the impugned order itself it will be apparent that notices were issued but there was no response whereafter summons were also issued giving opportunity to the establishment to produce records, but that was also not attended to. One Sister Blanche represented the establishment, but did not produce any record. The impugned order also would show that she had submitted written argument but did not produce the original registers etc. despite number of opportunities having been given. In that view of the matter, it cannot, strictu sensu, be said that the order was passed ex parte.;