We have heared counsel for the parties at length and with their consent, this Letters Patent Appeal is being disposed at this stage itself. We may only notice that the respondents have filed their counter affidavit even at this stage.

2. The appellant-company is aggrieved by the order passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Ranchi, under section 7A of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, in respect of its establishment for the relevant period from January, 1989 to November, 1992.

3. It appears from the impugned order dated 18.1.1994 that the matter was fixed for hearing on several dates. On some of the dates, the adjudicating authority, itself, was not available and on several dates, it appears that the appellant-company did not take diligent steps in the proceeding. Be that as it may, we find no fault with the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Ranchi who proceeded to pass an order u/s 7 A of the Act, even in the absence of the representative of the appellant-company.

4. What however we wish to emphasise is the fact that an adjudication u/s 7 A of the aforesaid Act is in a nature of quasi-judicial adjudication, and therefore, th