establishment had been proceeded ex-parte in the proceedings under Section 7-A of the Act by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner (RPFC) submitted that show-cause notices dated 31.03.2010 and 15.07.2010 were served upon the establishment. A perusal of notice dated 31.03.2010 shows that it was received by some caretaker in the premises. The order dated 20.09.2010 records that many hearings were conducted in the matter, but the same were not joined by the establishment. However, there is nothing to indicate that the establishment was ever served notice of these hearings. Regarding issuance of summons, their service upon the respondent-establishment, issuance of warrant of arrest against the establishment for securing its presence in 7-A proceedings, the Appellate Tribunal has observed as under: - “3 Heard the Ld. Counsels for the parties. In this case, the Commissioner had initiated proceedings under Section 7A of the Act by issuing summons to the appellant. As per the details given in the impugned Order, summonses were issued on various dates but none appeared for the appellant before the Commissioner. The Commissioner, during the proceedings, had also issued warrants of arrest against the appellant to secure their presence for the 7A proceedings but the presences of the appellant could not be secured. Justification to issue warrant of arrest of the appellant for its appearance is not assigned. Also, no reasons elaborated in the impugned order as to why the_
