Bal Bharti Public School vs Union Of India & Ors. on 13 October, 2015

1. Whether the notification issued by the Central Government under the
first proviso to Section 6 of the Employees’ Provident Funds and
Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (‘the Act’ for short) specifying an
establishment or class of establishments to be included therein will survive
the subsequent amendment/s made in the first proviso amending the rate at
which such establishment or class of establishments will be required to make
contribution to the Fund, is the question that arise for consideration in this
appeal by Letters Patent.
2. Learned Single Judge of this Court, by the judgment dated August 19,
2015 assailed before us, dismissed the writ petition preferred by the
appellant-writ petitioner seeking quashing of the order dated August 02,

LPA No.636/2015 Page 1 of 13
2000 passed by the Provident Fund Commissioner whereby the appellant
was directed to deposit its contribution to the Fund @ of 12% per month
with effect from September 22, 1997. Appellant also sought for the quashing
of the notification dated April 09, 1997 issued by the Central Government
and in the alternate, prayed for a declaration that the said notification cannot
be invoked by the respondents after amendment to the first proviso to
Section 6 of the Act, by Amendment Act No.10 of 1998 with effect from
September 22, 1997.

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply

*