The petitioner referred to the Madras High Court of « Sampath Kumaran and Co. », V. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, in which the High Court ruled that an institution of only four workers was voluntarily covered by the law by an application under Section 1 (4), after which the employer and workers restored liability under the law. The High Court found that despite the incorporation of the employer from a state of ownership to a partnership, since a majority of workers and the employer wish to withdraw from the liability under the law, the authorities are required to release it. In accordance with Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, where a person or organization of persons may act on its behalf, but at the same time is subject to obligations, it would be prepared to ask at any time to request the performance of such obligations, which are stagnated by their voluntary commission, by expressing once again unequivocally their desire not to be burdened by such commitments or obligations. , until the pre-trial detention proceedings are ongoing. On 6.03.2006, the petitioner and his staff requested the release of the reports under the law and the annulment of the proceedings under the law against the petitioner. This request was not accepted by the EPF authorities and was made in accordance with section 7Q of the Act and paragraph 14-B of the Law imposing damages in the event of a delay in assessment and the enforcement order under Section 8-F of the Act. This decision was challenged by the petitioner before the High Court, Madras. The petitioner submitted to the High Court: Section 1, paragraph 4 of the Act provides that the employer and the majority of workers, when appearing before the Commissioner of the Central Fund for Planning, have agreed that the provisions of this Act must be applicable to the establishment, whether they are made at its request on that or by other means. it may apply the provisions of this Act to this body by notification to the Official Journal on the date and date of this agreement or from a later date specified in this agreement. Article 1, paragraph 4, therefore provides for a voluntary possibility of being applicable to the law.
Paragraph 1, paragraph 5, of the Act provides that an agency to which this law applies continues to be regulated by that law, although the number of people employed there is at some point less than twenty. 6.Download the code letter with copies of all required documents and a copy of the completed application and send it to the EPFO office. All original documents to be verified by the EPFO authorities during the audit for a check in Q1283, Kidathirukkai Primary Agriculture C0-operative Bank, representing its secretary, Ramanathapuram District V. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, EPF Organisation, Madurai District et al` – 2012-II-LLJ-669 (Mad) Peter is a cooperative company registered under the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act of 1983.