VIKRAMAJIT SEN, ARIJIT PASAYAT, A.K.SIKRI
JAY PRESTRESED PRODUCTS LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
( 1 ) DISAGREEING with the views expressed by a division Bench of this Court in M/s. Mire Netting stores and Another vs. The Regional Provident Fund commissioner and Others (1981) L. I. C. 1015, reference has been made to a larger Bench to consider whether section 7-A of the Employees Provident Fund miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (in short the act ) is violative of Article 14 of the constitution of India, 1950 (in short constitution ). In the said case, it was held that in the absence of provision for appeal from the order of Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (in short the commissioned ) Section 7-A of the Act was hit by Article 14 of the Constitution.
( 2 ) INTEREST, in view of insertion of Sections 7d to 7p of the Act inter alia dealing with Constitution and functioning of Tribunal to deal with appeal from an order under Section 7-A even otherwise the view expressed in that case is not correct. Mere absence of an appellate forum would not render the provision relating to, adjudication unconstitutional. A similar view was expressed by a Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in M/s. Gammon India Ltd. etc. v. Union of India and Others AIR 1974 SC 960.
( 3 ) W
referred : M/s. Gammon India Ltd. etc. v. Union of India and Others
Fatehchand v. State of Maharashtra
K.L.Gupta v. Corporation Greater Bombay
Chinta Lingam v. Government of India
Pannalal Binjraj v. Union of India
Organo Chemical Industries v. Union of India
Additionally in Sumedico Corporation and Another v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.