ORDER

1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs :--

“(i) Call for the records pertaining to the case.

(ii) Set aside the impugned order dated 15.6.2022 passed by the learned Central Government Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court/EPF Appellate Tribunal, Jabalpur in Case No.CGIT/LC/EPFA-59-2019;

(iii) Hold that the EPF Act is not applicable to the petitioner;

(iv) Any other appropriate writ/order/direction, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fir and proper also kindly be issued in the interest of justice.”

2. Short facts giving rise to the present petition are that one complaint has been filed to the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Jabalpur (for brevity, the ‘RPFC’) on 15.9.2006 (Annexure-A/2). On the said complaint, notices have been issued on 24.4.2007. The petitioner had submitted objection in response to the notice on 25.6.2007. The RPFC passed an order holding that the EPF is applicable vide order dated 21.7.2010. Again objections were submitted vide objection dated 17.8.2010 in regard to the applicability of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for brevity hereinafter referred to as the ‘EPF Act’). Simultaneously, a review petition was filed by the petitioner for reviewing the order dated 21.7.2010 passed by the RPFC. The said review petition was dismissed vide order dated 10.9.2010. Again, second review application was filed against the order dated 21.7.2010 which also came to be dismissed vide order dated 7.10.2010. Thereafter, appeal has been filed against the order passed in the review on 7.10.2010. The Appellate Tribunal has allowed the appeal and remanded the matter back to the RPFC with a direction to decide the second review application on its own merits. Same was decided vide order dated 3.10.2016. Thereafter, on 24.4.2019, the RPFC has passed the final order assessing the dues of 107 employees of the petitioner’s establishment to be paid by the petitioner. When such amount has not been deposited with the respondent No.1, the accounts of the petitioner’s establishment were freezed vide order dated 13.6.2019. Being aggrieved by the action of the authority of freezing the accounts, the petitioner had preferred a writ petition being W.P. No.16572/2019. This Court, vide order dated 19.8.2019, quashed the order dated 13.6.2019 of freezing of the accounts of the petitioner and gave liberty to the petitioner to assail the original order of the respondent no.1 whereby, the order under section 7-A of the EPF Act has been passed. Thereafter, the appeal was preferred under section 7(I) of the Act of 1952 before the CGIT. The CGIT, vide order dated 15.6.2022, has dismissed the appeal holding that the original order dated 30.9.2016/3.10.2016 by which the authority has made the EPF Act applicable upon the petitioner has not been challenged within the period of limitation and it has attained finality between the parties and thus, for question in regard to the applicability, it has been held that in absence of challenge of original order which attained finality, it is applicable and accordingly, dismissed the appeal.

3. It has been contented by learned counsel for the petitioner that the CGIT has wrongly held that the order dated 30.9.2016/3.10.2016 has not been challenged and has attained finality because such order got merged with the final order passed by the authority assessing the amount of payment under the EPF Act. It is submitted that the said order of initiation of proceedings against the EPF Act under section 7-A was passed vide order dated 21.7.2010 (Annexure-P/1). Thereafter, several reviews have been filed and on rejection of the review applications, the appeal was preferred before the EPF Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal, vide order dated 10.6.2014, remanded back the matter to the RPFC to decide the review on its own merits. The same was decided vide order dated 3.10.20