VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)

1. By this petition, challenge is laid by the petitioner to the impugned order of the respondent No. 2-Employees’ Provident Funds Appellate Tribunal dated 27.7.2005. The Appellate Tribunal by the impugned order has held that petitioner’s industry which makes products from desiccated or dry/brown coconuts is covered under the entry “Fruit and Vegetable Preservation Industry” as found in Schedule-I of the Employees’ Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short the “EPF Act”).

2. The only issue before this Court is as to whether coconut is or is not a fruit. Before adverting to this aspect, it must be noted that coconut is sold in various forms. As a green coconut it is sold for its water and its kernel, as a dry coconut it is used as an offering to God as also for using as supplement or addition to various cooked dishes. Coconut so far as the petitioner’s industry is concerned is being used in desiccated form i. e dry/dehydrated coconut and converted to either shredded form or grinded/powdered form. The issue is whether this work and industry falls within the expression “fruit” industry as found in the relevant entry u