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

2023 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 8859

HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Hon`ble Mr Justice G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN
Central Board of Trustees EPF – Appellant
Versus
Presiding Officer Employees – Respondent


ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the first respondent, thereby allowed the appeal filed by the second respondent.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent and perused the materials available on record.

3. The second respondent firm is covered under the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provision Act, 1952 (herein after referred to as the “Act”). It failed to remit the Provident Fund and Insurance Fund dues with all eligible components of wages for the period from April 2009 to February 2012. In order to determine the amount payable in respect of the second respondent, an enquiry was initiated under Section 7A of the Act. The second respondent was summoned to appear before the enquiry with all supportive documents. During enquiry, the Enforcement Officer submitted his report stating that the second respondent has not enrolled 26 employees and also not paid Provident Fund, Insurance Fund and Employees' Pension Fund Contributions and Administrative Charges towards Provident Fund and Insurance Fund with all eligible components of wages. The Enforcement Officer als

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