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
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.