BINOY KUMAR
Rajasthan State Mines & Minerals Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Prabhat Kumar Chaturvedi – Respondent
ORDER
The present Revision Petition under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) has been filed by Petitioners against the Order dated 11.07.2016 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajasthan (hereinafter referred to as the “State Commission”) in First Appeal No.104/2012, whereby the Appeal filed by the Petitioners was dismissed and the Order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Udaipur (hereinafter referred to as the “District Forum”) was maintained.
2. Brief facts of the case as per the Complaint are that the Respondent No.1/Complainant was an employee, as on 01.03.1974, in Rajasthan State Industrial & Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. (RIMDC) and was transferred in January, 1976 to another project. The Contributory Provident Fund was not deducted by the Corporation on the ground that these mines are not included in the schedule under Employees Provident Fund Act, 1952. In an Order of the Government of India, dated 14.01.1977, it was clarified that all mining units fall under the Employees Provident Fund Act, 1952. In 1979, the Complainant was assigned to Rajasthan State Mineral Developmen
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.