JAYANTA KUMAR BISWAS, J.

1. THE petitioner in this Article 226 petition dated November 14,2005 is alleging that he has not been paid provident fund for the entire period he has served the establishment.

2. FROM the letter of the Asstt. P.F. Commissioner, SRO, Howrah dated May 20, 2005 Annexure P9 at p.69, it appears that the establishment was directed to submit necessary documents and deposit provident fund contributions for the petitioner's benefit. Since nothing was done and the provident fund organization did not release provident fund, the petitioner took out this petition. Counsel for the establishment submits that there was no scope for depositing contributions for the petitioner's benefit for the period in question, since during the period the petitioner was not in actual employment of the company. He says that in compliance with the order of the Supreme Court the petitioner was paid compensation and hence there was no question of depositing contributions to any fund. He points out that the establishment has been granted exemption from the statutory schemes.

The undisputed position is that the establishment did not respond to the letter dated May 20, 2005. The, Comm