b IN THE HIGH CWRT OF KAPP4ATAKA AT B,NSaLORF LATED ThIS THE 4Th DAY OF JJNE 1998 BEFORE ThE HON’ StE MR .JUSTICE G .PATR I SASAVANA GOUD bNUT PETIT ION NINBER 23061 OF 1990 s_flaflns5550sesnsaanones S Between: H/s Ashok Plantatjons(P) Ltd., Ibinavalvedi village Boiker, Post, Madikeri kodagu District represented by its Managing Director 6 ri T. H. Rajan. —Petitioner (By ri B. Shagath Kumar, Advocate) And: 1 • The tkiion of India Ministry of Labou by Its Secretary New Delhi 2. The Regional ‘rovident Fund Coanissioner II ‘Yenepoya’ Commercial Complex Balamatta, Man4alore 575 002 3. Enforcement Officer Office of the Employees Provident Funda, Coorg Division No.!, Jyothi Nilaya Ham Comnound Madikeri 511 201 —Respordents (By Central Government Staneir’g Counsel) This writ petflior’ is fHed under Articles 226 and 221 of the ‘onstitution seeking to siath the notice dated 21—9-19912 at AnnexurpaF in o. KN/PF/SRO/ENFI/COV/CDN 1/2991/90. This writ petition coming on rot hearin; t I day, the Court made the following: ORDER —2- OR Dfl By Ainexure F, respondent No.2 Regional Provident Fund Commissioner has informed the petitioner as to the apolicability of the Employees provident Fund end Miscellaneous Provjons Act, 1952 (‘Act’ for short), which AnnexureeF is sought to be quashed in this writ petition under Articles 226 end 227 of the Constitution. 2. Petitioner claims that he is entitled to infancy protection under Section 16 of the Act. If his clai, cons to be upheld. for the periods mentioned in AnnexureeF, obviously he ould not be liable to pay contributions. It is where the dispute like the resent one has arser regrding appli cability of the Act in an estabiistaent ith regard to determination of the amount due, that an eiquiry is contemplated under Section 7A of the Act. Thouch t e seco d resoordent initia fly could not be found fault with in/issuing AnnexureeF. hu,s that the petitioner claims infancy protection under Section 16 as per the representation at AnnexureeF, it is to be a takers as giving rise to a dispute that needs to be determined under Section 7A of the Act. It j therefore directed that the send respondent shall now hold an enquiry under 5 eetion 7A of the Act and then decide the dispute relating to the applicability of the Act. & to determine the amount following that decision. 5. rlt Petition is disposed accordingly. JUl GE * Lr.