I.A. Ansari, J.

1. Considering the fact that all these writ petitions, made under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, have raised common questions of law, based on identical facts, all the writ petitions, on the request made by the learned counsel for the parties concerned, have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. The basic case of the writ petitioners may, in brief, be set out as under :

Ordinarily, in a Tea Estate, though not necessarily in all the Tea Estates, rice and atta are made available by the management of the Tea Estate to their workmen at highly concessional rate. Making of rice and atta so available at concessional rate does not according to the petitioners, form part of the basic wages of the workman concerned/but Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Agartala, has by his letter, dated 07.11.2009, initiated a proceeding, under Sections 6-A and 6-C of the EPF Act read with paragraph 38 of the Employees Provident Fund Scheme, 1995, in purported exercise of his power under Section 7A of the EPF Act, directing the petitioners to produce certain records for the purpose of holding an enquiry if the petitioners are liable for having not contributed, as required by law, for, the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner has taken the view that rice and atta, made available at a concessional rate, is covered by the term cash value of food concession and, therefore, falls within the definition of basic wages, though, according to the petitioners, no notification, in this regard, has been issued by the Government making the employer liable to make contribution for the employer's act of providing to his employees rice and atta at concessional rate as indicated hereinbefore. The proceeding, which was so initiated by letter, dated 07.11.2009, aforementioned, stands culminated into issuance of a letter, dated 13.08.2010, directing the petitioners to make payment of their contribution for the cash value of food concession as basic wages.

2. I have heard Mr. D.K. Biswas, learned counsel, for the petitioners, and Mr. A.S. Lodh, learned counsel, for the respondent No. 2. I have also heard Mr. N.C. Pal, learned Govt. Counsel, Tripura, for the respondent No. 3.

3. Before proceeding to determine as what the meaning of the term basic wages is, it needs to be pointed out that the term basic wages has been defined in Section 2(b) of the EPF Act. Section 5 of the EPF Act introduces the concept of employees provident fund scheme for those industries, which are included in Schedule 1 to the EPF Act.

4. Section 2(b) of the EPF Act, which defines basic wages, reads as follows :

Section 2(b) "basic 'wages" means all emoluments which are earned by an employee while on duty or on leave or on holidays with wages in either case in accordance with the terms of the contract of employment and which are paid or payable in cash to him, but does not include :

i. the cash value of any food concession;

ii. any dearness allowance (that is to say, all cash payments by whatever name called paid to an employee on account of a rise in the cost of living), house-rent allowance, overtime allowance, bonus, commission or any other similar allowance payable to the employee in respect of his employment or of work done in such employment;

iii. any presents made by the employer.

5. From a bare reading of the definition of basic wages, as embodied in Section 2(b) of the EPF Act, it clearly follows that basic wages mean all emoluments, which are earned by an employee, while on duty or on leave, or on holidays with wages, in either case, in accordance with the terms of the contract of employment and which are paid or payable in cash to him. Basic wages would not, however, include :

(i) the cash value of any food concession;

(ii) any dearness allowance (that is to say, all cash by whatever name called paid to an employee on account of rise in the cost of living), house rent allowance, overtime allowance, bonus, commission or any o