Kurian Joseph, J.

Provident Fund is intended to provide for the welfare of the employees. The Act is specifically captioned as the “Employees Provident Fund Act”. An employee takes birth only through an employer. The backbone of employer is the employee. Interdependence is hence an existential factor for both. However, in view of the contributory nature of the provident fund, certain small establishments were excluded from the purview of operation of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, apart from the statutory exemption in the case of employees who are similarly or otherwise provided such benefits. This much introduction on the welfare legislation would serve as a prelude to the interpretation of the provisions of the Act while analysing the question arising for consideration in these appeals. The main question is whether a factory which is not engaged in an industry is covered by the Act.

2. Short facts. The appellants are the writ petitioners. They are proprietors of two factories. The said factories are engaged in the manufacture, assembly and sale of umbrellas. The factories are registered under the provisions of the Factories Act and are also covered by the Employees State Insurance Act. The contention is that being factories not engaged in any industry as specified in Schedule I of the Act, they are not covered by the provisions of the EPF and MP Act, 1952. The Provident Fund Organisation and Tribunal held against the petitioners. According to the Provident Fund Organisation, the establishment of the petitioners are covered by Entry 24 of the Notification, namely “every trading and commercial establishment engaged in the purchase, sale or storage of any goods, including establishment of exporters, importers, advertisers, commission agents and brokers and commodity and stock exchanges but not including banks or warehouses established under any Central or State Act”. The Tribunal took the view that the establishment would also be covered by item 3 of the notification namely, electrical, mechanical or general engineering products. The learned single Judge examined the question as to whether the petitioners’ establishment will be covered by the trading and commercial establishment and held against the petitioners and hence the appeals. The other question was left open.

3. Section 1(3) of the Act provides for the application of the Act. It reads as follows:-

“1(3) Subject to the provisions contained in section 16, it applies—

(a) to every establishment which is a factory engaged in any industry specified in Schedule I and in which twenty or more persons are employed, and

(b) to any other establishment employing twenty or more persons or class of such establishments which the Central Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, specify in this behalf:

Provided that the Central Government may, after giving not less than two months’ notice of its intention so to do, by notification in the Official Gazette, apply the provision of this Act to any establishment employing such number of persons less than twenty as may be specified in the notification”.

Section 16 provides as follows:-

“16. Act not to apply to certain establishments.—

(1) The Act shall not apply—

(a) to any establishment registered under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1912 ( 2 of 1912), or under any other law for the time being in force in any State relating to co-

operative societies, employing less than fifty persons and working without the aid of power; or

(b) to any other establishment belonging to or under the control of the Central Government or a State Government and whose employees are entitled to the benefit to contributory provident fund or old age pension in accordance with any scheme or rule framed by the Central Government or the state Government governing such benefits; or

(c) to any other establishment set up under any Central, Provincial or State Act and whose employees are entitled to the benef