Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 978 (RAJ)

Shriram Rayons, A Unit Of Dcm Shriram Industries Ltd. v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner

2019-04-02

VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA

body2019
JUDGMENT Veerendr Singh Siradhana, J. - Aggrieved of the order dated 6th March, 2019, made by the Appellate Tribunal; the petitioner has approached this Court to completely do away with the condition of pre-deposit which requires 75% of the amount determined under Section 7-A of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short, 'the Act of 1952'). 2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, as a scheme for trainees, who were engaged for training was already in place, the provisions of Section 7A of the Act of 1952, could not have been invoked, without first determination of the relationship of "employer" and "employee". 3. Learned counsel further urged that, the determination which has been made subject matter of the pending appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, is yet to be considered but the condition of pre-deposit of 75% has been diluted only to the extent of 30%, whereas the same is required to be dispensed within toto, in the factual matrix of the case at hand. Heard and considered. 4. A glance of scheme which has been heavily relied upon by the counsel for the petitioner would indicate that this scheme itself describes itself to be a "Scheme for Worker Trainees". Thus, in the factual matrix of the case at hand; prima facie, the view taken of the Appellate Tribunal granting relaxation to the extent of 30% deposit of the among determined under section 7A of the Act of 1957, vide impugned order dated 6th March, 2019; cannot be faulted so as to call for any interference by this Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 and/or 227 of the Constitution of India. 5. In the result, writ application fails, and is, hereby dismissed. However, the Appellate Tribunal would proceed with and conclude the pending proceedings as expeditiously as possible; preferably, within six months from the date a certified copy of this order is presented. 6. As prayed, the petitioner is allowed two weeks' time to make deposit of 30% of pre-deposit as directed vide impugned order dated 6th March, 2019.