The court emphasized the need for the EPF authorities to determine the applicability of the EPF Act to the petitioner Cooperative Society under Section 16(1)(a) and proceed with the determination of dues if found realizable.

None appears on call for the petitioner.

2. Heard S.S. Roy, learned CGC for respondent no.1, and Mr. P.K. Roy, learned senior counsel, assisted by Ms. A. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the respondent nos.2 to 5.

3. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, initiation of a fresh proceedings of a fresh proceedings under Section 7A of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (“EPF Act” for short) vide communication no. NE/GHY/3310/2804-05, dated 30.05.2013 has been assailed.

4. The case projected by the petitioner is that the initiation of previous proceedings under Section 7A of the EPF Act vide Order No. AS/3310/ENF/2400 dated 05.10.1998 was quashed by this Court by order dated 23.02.2006, passed in WP(C) 4320/1999. Accordingly, it is projected that by initiating a fresh proceedings under Section 7A of the EPF Act, the respondent authorities are attempting to render the render the order of this Court dated 23.02.2006, passed in WP(C) 4320/1999 as redundant. It is also projected that the provisions of EPF Act does not apply to the petitioner, which is a Housing Cooperative Society in view of the bar contained in Section 16(1)(a) of the EPF Act.

5. The learned senior counsel for the respondent nos.2 to 5 has submitted that the previous notice under Section 7A of the EPF Act was a result of ex parte proceedings and the petitioner did not participate in the said proceedings. It is submitted that the previous order of this Court dated 23.02.2006, passed in WP(C) 4320/1999 did not prohibit the respondent authorities to satisfy itself about their empowerment to collect PF dues found satisfaction that the cooperative society as in its employment either directing or contractors, workers exceeding 50 and working with the aid of power. It is submitted that from the order dated 23.02.2006, passed in WP(C) 4320/1999, it is not in dispute that the petitioner society undertakes construction of residential flat at different locations through different contractors. Accordingly, it is submitted that vide letter dated 28.03.2008, the Regional P.F. Commissioner (i/c) had merely sought for an advice from the Addl. Central P.F. Commissioner (East Zone), EPFO as to whether to refund the deposited and recovered amount to the establishment with interest and/or to codify the establishment as 103, by highlighting that the quashing of the previous order puts an end to the coverage of the establishment till 05.10.1998 and therefore, coverage beyond 05.10.1998 was not barred. It was further submitted that proceedings under Section 7A of the EPF Act vide orders under memo no. NE/GHY/3310/2804-05, dated 30.05.2013 is merely to determine the coverage of the establishment under the EPF Act and therefore, the petitioner has to cooperate with the adjudicatory process by setting satisfying the authorities that they are having less than 50 workers working without the aid of power. It is submitted that by the said impugned communication dated 30.05.2013, the petitioner was granted more time to appear with the relevant records by fixing the date of enquiry on 26.06.2013. Accordingly, it is submitted that the respondents be permitted to conclude their enquiry/ determination as envisaged under Section 7A of the EPF Act.

6. The provisions of Section 7A and Section 16(1)(a) of the EPF Act are quoted below:

“7A: Determination of moneys due from employers:

(1) The Central Provident Fund Commissioner, any Additional Central Provident Fund Commissioner, any Deputy Provident Fund Commissioner, any Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, or any Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner may, by order,—

(a) in a case where a dispute arises regarding the applicability of this Act to an establishment, decide such dispute; and

(b) determine the amount due from any employer under any provision of this Act, the Scheme or the 3[Pension] Scheme or the Insurance Scheme, as the case may be,

and for any of the aforesaid purposes may cond