S. Talapatra, J.:— Heard Ms. P. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also heard Mr. B. Majumder, learned CGC appearing for the respondents.
2. The grievance of the petitioner emanates from the order dated 10.11.2021 made in Diary No. 10 of 2021 [Annexure-E to the writ petition]. It appears that the petitioner preferred one review petition on 17.02.2020 against the order dated 30.01.2019 under Section 7A of the Employees Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II, whereby the recovery of the determined due was directed. It has been observed in the said order that the review petition as filed was not in the prescribed Form-9 under para-79A of the EPF Scheme, 1952 and there had been no discovery of new and important facts which may persuade the reviewing authority to review the order as noted. Thereafter, the review petition has been rejected by the said order dated 10.11.2021 on technical ground, as the review petition was not in proper form. It is obvious that the review has not been dismissed on merit. It was the duty of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II to return the review petition as it was not acceptable inasmuch as it was not filed in the prescribed form-9 under para-79A of the EPF Scheme, 1952. But he has passed the order by rejecting the review petition.
3. In view of that, the order dated 10.11.2021 is set aside subject to that the petitioner shall file fresh review petition in Form-9 under para-79A of the EPF Scheme, 1972 within a period of 15(fifteen) days from today. If such review petition is not filed, this order dated 10.11.2021 shall be treated as resurrected for all purposes. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of.
4. No order as to costs.
5. A copy of this order be furnished to Mr. B. Majumder, learned CGC appearing for the respondents forthwith.