S.J.MUKHOPADHAYA, J. - (1.) This application has been preferred by Ranchi Gosnala against the Order No. 2736/93, dated February 5, 1994 passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Ranchi in a proceeding under Section 7-A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short E.P.F. Act). By the aforesaid order, the respondents held the petitioner an "Establishment" and a sum of Rs. 66,331.00 as dues payable by the petitioner on various accounts under the E.P.F. Act. One of the pleas taken by the petitioner is that the provisions of Section 7-A of the E.P.F. Act is not applicable in the case of the petitioner, it being not an "Establishment" nor is it a manufacturer.
(2.) From the impugned order aforesaid, it will be evident that the petitioner disputed the applicability of the E.P.F. Act on the following grounds: "A. The Unit is a charitable institution established under the Bihar Goshala Act, 1950 and is always in short of funds. B. The establishment is excluded from the purview of even the Minimum Wages Act. C. The establishment is not a factory engaged in any industry specified in the Schedule I. D. No notification covering the establishment has been issued under Section l(3)(b)".
(3.) However, it has not been accepted by the respondents on the ground that the petitioner's Establishment has completed 3/5 years from the date of set up, have employed more than 20 employees and petitioner s Establishment is a 'Factory' notified under Schedule I under Section l(3)(a)/fall under the notified class of establishments under Section l(3)(b).;