JUDGMENT

Rajendra Babu, J.-The appellant before us is a manufacturer of beedis. He challenged an order made by the respondents under Section 7-A of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ]. The appellant had not deducted from the wages of the home workers employed through contractors for manufacture of beedis because of pendency of litigation in order to contribute towards the provident fund on the ground that the Act would not be applicable in cases of such employees. Earlier on the receipt of a notice under the Act from the respondents the appellant challenged the notice in the High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 4089 of 1988 on the ground that the Act has no application in respect of home workers engaged in rolling the beedis engaged through independent contractors. An interim stay had been granted by the court during the pendency of the proceeding. By an order made on July 27, 1989 the said writ petition was dismissed by holding that the provisions of the Act are applicable in respect of home workers engaged in rolling the beedis of the petitioner s establishment through contractors. This decision was questioned before thi