The main legal point established is that orders passed under Section 7-A of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 are appealable under Section 7-I, and the power of review under Section 7-B is limited to specific conditions.

JUDGMENT :

1. Factual matrix of present case, in brief, are that petitioner has suffered with an order dated 18.10.2021 passed under Section 7-A of Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 1952”). Being aggrieved petitioner filed a review petition under Section 7-B of Act, 1952 which was dismissed vide order dated 22.09.2022. Both the above referred orders are under challenge before this Court.

2. At the outset, Sri Mukteshwar Upadhyay, learned counsel appearing for Respondent-1, raised a preliminary objection that any order passed under Section 7-A of Act, 1952 is appealable under Section 7-I of Act, 1952 as well as the order passed in review petition is an order under Section 7-B(5), therefore, it is also appealable under Section 7-I of Act, 1952 and the present writ petition is not maintainable due to statutory alternative remedy available to petitioner.

3. Sri Amrendra Nath Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Ajay Singh, learned counsel for petitioner, fairly submitted that any order passed under Section 7-A of Act, 1952 is appealable under Section 7-I of Act, however, every order passed under Section 7-B(5) is not appealable under Section 7-I. He referred both the provisions and for reference Section 7-B and 7-I of Act, 1952 are reproduced hereinafter:

“7-B. Review of orders passed under section 7-A.—(1) Any person aggrieved by an order made under sub-section (1) of section 7-A, but from which no appeal has been preferred under this Act, and who, from the discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of due diligence was not within his knowledge or could not be produced by him at the time when the order was made, or on account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record or for any other sufficient reason, desires to obtain a review of such order may apply for a review of that order to the officer who passed the order:

Provided that such officer may also on his own motion review his order if he is satisfied that it is necessary so to do on any such ground.

(2) Every application for review under sub-section (1) shall be filed in such form and manner and within such time as may be specified in the Scheme.

(3) Where it appears to the officer receiving an application for review that there is no sufficient ground for a review, he shall reject the application.

(4) Where the officer is of opinion that the application for review should be granted, he shall grant the same:

Provided that,—

(a) no such application shall be granted without previous notice to all the parties before him to enable them to appear and be heard in support of the order in respect of which a review is applied for, and

(b) no such application shall be granted on the ground of discovery of new matter or evidence which the applicant alleges was not within his knowledge or could not be produced by him when the order was made, without proof of such allegation.

(5) No appeal shall lie against the order of the officer rejecting an application for review, but an appeal under this Act shall lie against an order passed under review as if the order passed under review were the original order passed by him under section 7-A.”

“7-I. Appeals to Tribunal.—(1) Any person aggrieved by a notification issued by the Central Government, or an order passed by the Central Government or any authority, under the proviso to subsection (3), or sub-section (4), of section 1, or section 3, or subsection (1) of section 7-A, or section 7-B except an order rejecting an application for review referred to in sub-section (5) thereof, or section 7-C, or section 14-B, may prefer an appeal to a Tribunal against such notification or order.

(2) Every appeal under sub-section (1) shall be filed in such form and manner, within such time and be accompanied by such fees, as may be prescribed.”

4. Learned Senior Advocate made reference of the grounds mentioned in review petition specifically Points No.