SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1966 Supreme(MP) 138

R.J.BHAVE, P.V.DIXIT
RADHAKRISHAN NARAYANDAS – Appellant
Versus
REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G.P.SINGH, H.L.KHASKALAM, K.A.Chitale

DIXIT, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS order will also govern the disposal of Misc. Petitions Nos. 496 of 1964, 134 and 387 of 1965 and 30, 31, 64 and 387 of 1966.

( 2 ) THE petitioners in these eight cases are engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of Bidis. By these applications they challenge the applicability of the employees Provident Funds Act, 1952, (hereinafter called the Act), and the employees Provident Funds Scheme. 1952, (hereinafter referred to as the scheme), to their establishments. They pray that the notices issued to them by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Madhya Pradesh (hereinafter called equivalent Citation: the Commissioner), requiring them to remit the Provident Fund contributions and administrative charges and to submit the statements required of them under the act and the Scheme within the periods specified in the notices, be quashed by the issue of writs of certiorari and the Commissioner be restrained from enforcing the provisions of the Act against them. The Commissioner has also determined provisionally the amount payable by some of the petitioners and has issued notices to them under Section 7a of the Act asking them to appear and to show cause why

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top