- (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties. The petitioner has sought quashing of the order dated 27.1.2005, by which his application under section 7A of the Employees' Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 has been rejected. The petitioner had come before this Court earlier challenging the order dated 28th November, 2003 passed by Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Jharkhand, Ranchi under section 7A of the Employees' Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1952). The said writ petition being W.P. (C) No. 4408 of 2004 was dismissed, however, giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the respondents invoking the remedy under sub-section (4) of section 7A of the said Act of 1952. The petitioner thereafter preferred his application vide Annexure-5 and the impugned order dated 27th January, 2005 has been passed rejecting the same by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner (Compliance), EPF Organization, Regional Officer, Ranchi.
(2.) The petitioner assails the impugned order stating that the notices for initiation of a proceedings were issued for a period of 1st January, 2001 to September, 2001, instead the respondent-A.P.F.C., has, in the impugned order, observed that with the consent of the employer, the period of inquiry was modified from 1st January, 2001 to December, 2002.
(3.) The petitioner states that he had submitted returns and filed challan in respect of the employees, which were on his rolls and deposited the amount due against Provident Fund Contribution on the part of the employer vide Annexures 8 and Annexure-9 for the periods February, 2001 to August, 2001 and September, 2001 to October, 2001 respectively. It is the contention of the petitioner that contrary to his consent, the learned Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner has extended the period of inquiry beyond September, 2001, although the petitioner was never noticed in respect of the same.;