The Munger Tobacco Manufacturing Union vs The Union of India and Others

Anjana Prakash, J.—The petitioner seeks issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the letter issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Provident Fund, respondent no. 3 dated 21.6.1996 directing the Indian Tobacco Company, respondent no. 5 to implement the Employees Provident Fund (sic-- Scheme?) 1995 and submit the compliance report as also for quashing letter dated 24.7.1996 and notice dated 14.8.1996 issued by the Human Resources Manager and rejection of the objection of the petitioner respectively. It further sought issuance of a writ in the nature of commanding the respondents to continue with the Provident Fund Scheme existing in the Indian Tobacco Company, Basudeopur, Munger prior to 1995. No one appears on behalf of the petitioner.

It has been submitted on behalf of the respondent no. 3 i.e. the Assistant Commissioner, Provident Fund Organization that similar issues had arisen before other High Courts and the matter has been laid to rest now that the scheme was implementable and beneficial to the employees and not sustainable to challenge any more.

The Counsel for Indian Tobacco Company supports the stand of the Provident Fund Commissioner and submits that they have already implemented the scheme, the operation of which is in fact beneficial to the employees. In view of such considerations, the application is dismissed.