JUDGMENT : B.P. Dharmadhikari, J. Heard Shri A. Parihar, learned Counsel for Petitioner and Shri S.K. Gupta with Shri S.N. Dandekar, learned Counsel for Respondent, 2. Learned Counsel for Petitioner contends that, in 7A Enquiry, balance sheet for the year 2002-03 was not produced and according to him, documents filed along with the counter were also not produced, He states that in such circumstances, interest of justice demands that in order to verify the nature of huge payments made to alleged C&F Agents, the matter should be remanded back and fresh enquiry u/s 7-A should be allowed to be conducted. 3. Shri Gupta, learned Counsel contends that the documents filed along with the counter particularly Annexure R2 snowing list of 9 C&F agents were already produced before the Petitioner. He further states that those documents were also forming part of appeal memo before the EPFAT and copy of the appeal memo was also given to the Petitioner. According to him, the finding recorded is not that the said documents were not produced. 4. The orders passed by the Appellate Authority considers the question of basic wages and whether the money paid to Agents can be considered as covered there under i.e., u/s 2(b) of the Employees' Provident Fund and Misc. Provisions Act, 1952. The Appellate Authority has further recorded that amount was paid to C&F agents and some amounts are ex gratia payment It has been recorded that this amount cannot be treated as wages, as the same have not been paid to all the employees and Clearing and Forwarding Agents are not the employees. The further discussion shows that the Appellate Authority has found that the money paid as commission cannot be regarded as wages. 5. The fact that balance sheet for the year 2002-03 was not produced before the Petitioner, is not in dispute. The findings reached by the Appellate Authority mentioned above are not being assailed before this Court. Petitioners are not in a position to demonstrate prejudice caused if the list of 9 C&F Agents was not filed during Section 7-A Enquiry. The Respondents have stated before this Court that said list was also produced in the enquiry. 6. As I do not find anything wrong with the I orders, of the Appellate Authority, I am not I inclined to interfere in the same in exercise of ' writ jurisdiction, Writ Petition is therefore, Dismissed. The Respondents have stated before this Court that said list was also produced in the enquiry. 6. As I do not find anything wrong with the I orders, of the Appellate Authority, I am not I inclined to interfere in the same in exercise of ' writ jurisdiction, Writ Petition is therefore, Dismissed. No costs.