1. In this appeal against acquittal by the State of Bombay a short but important point of law arises for our decision. There fire three respondents in this appeal and respondent No. J is the Hathiwala Textile Mills at Begumpura, while respondent No. 2 and respondent No. 3 are its occupier and Manager respectively. On 4-3-1952 the Employees Provident Funds Act (No. 19 of 1952) was made applicable with the result that the workers of the factory began to enjoy the benefits of provident fund under the provisions of the Act. It is not disputed that the respondents complied with the provisions of the Act sometime till April 1954. On the 6-4-1954 it seems that the weaving department of the respondent Mills was closed. It appears that even though the weaving department was closed, the Engineering department continued. But the number of workers in the factory fell below the figure of 50. The employers, therefore, thought that the workers in their factory would no longer be entitled to the benefits under the Employees Provident Funds Scheme and, therefore, they addressed a letter to the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner on the 10-6-1954, pointing out that they had two department