IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12015 of 2008 Chandra Prakash son of Sri Baidyanath Prasad, resident of Mohalla- Club Road, Mithanpura, P.S.- Mithanpura, District- Muzaffarpur. Versus 1. The Employment Provident Fund Organisation “R” Block, Patna through the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner. 2. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, the Employees Provident Fund Organization, “R” Block, Patna. 3. The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, The Employees Provident Fund Organization, 1st Floor New Vakalathana Bhawan, Court Compound, Muzaffarpur. ----------- 3 16.08.2011 The present writ application has been filed for quashing the letter dated 24.04.2008 issued by respondent no.3 whereby the respondent no.3 has been pleased to give notice under Section 7(A) of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The claim of the petitioner is that in the school only 14 employees are working out of which two are regular and rest 12 are temporary, hence the petitioner is not covered under the provisions of Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The other claim of the petitioner is that he could not file the show cause because the enquiry report was not supplied to him. It appears from the counter affidavit that the 2 petitioner has not supplied the documentary evidence of his claim in spite of 11 opportunities given to the petitioners. Moreover, the counter affidavit reflects that the enquiry report was supplied to the petitioner which has not been annexed with the writ application. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the school has been closed. In the circumstances, this Court finds no merit in the writ application. The writ application is dismissed. Amrendra/ ( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)