REFERENCE

ISSUE RAISED/FACTS

HELD

1

H.M.T

EX-SERVICEMEN’S

ASSOCIATION

Vs

UNION OF INDIA

[2001(89) FLR 1098]

HC-KER-SB]

1

CANA SECTION OF THE EMPLOYEES BE GRANTED EXEMPTION FROM EMP PENSION SCHEME 1995 ON THE GROUND THAT THEY ALREADY HAVE PENSION SCHEME?

1

2

AS PER PARA 39 OF THE EMP.PENSION SCHEME 1995, THERE IS NO SCOPE FOR GRANTING PARTIAL EXEMPTION TO A SECTION OF EMPLOYEES

THE SCHEME ENVISAGES ONLY EXEMPTION FOR THE WHOLE ESTABLISHMENT.

2

HARRISONS

MALAYALAM Vs

REG.PF COMMISSIONER

2001(89) FLR 990[HC-CAL-SB]

1

2

3

AN EMPLOYEE TOOK VRS AND CLAIMED HIS EPF DUES AND BECAME AN ‘EXCLUDED EMPLOYEE’

COMPANY THEN OFFERED HIM FRESH EMPLOYMENT ON RETAINER BASIS OF RS.3500/-PM

CAN EPF AUTHORITIES INSIST ON HIS FRESH COVERAGE UNDER EPF ACT?

1

2

SINCE HIS SLARY AFTER REENGAGEMENT IS WITHIN COVERAGE LIMIT HE MUST BE COVERED EVENTHOUGH HE HAD DRAWN HIS PF DUES EARLIER AND BECOME AN EXCLUDED EMPLOYEE

[HOWEVER IF HIS RE-EMPLOYMENT IS ON A SALARY ABOVE THE COVERAGE LIMIT, HE NEED NOT BE ENROLLED IN EPF]

3

BATA INDIA LTD Vs

UNION OF INDIA

2001(II)LLJ 212 [HC-PAT-DB]

1

 2

3

4

AN ESTABLISHMENT WAS GRANTED EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 17(1)

IS SUCH AN ESTABLISHMENT BOUND TO MAINTAIN ACCOUNTS OF CONTRACT WORKMEN?

CAN THE EPF AUTHORITIES ISIST THAT PRINCIPAL EMPLOYER SHOULD MAINTAIN ACCOUNT OF CONTRACTORS WORKMEN WHEN CONTRACTOR APPLIED FOR SEPARATE CODE NUMBER.

CAN EPF AUTHORITIES REFUSE A SEPARATE CODE NUMBER FOR CONTRACTORS?

1

2

AN ESTABLISHMENT GRANTED EXEPTION UNDER SECTION 17 NEED MAINTAIN ACCOUNTS ONLY OF ITS OWN EMPLOYEES.

EPF AUTHORITIES TO CONSIDER ISSUE OF SEPARATE CODE NUMBER FOR CONTRACTORS.

[NOTE:

EPF AUTHORITIES ARE PLANNING TO CHALLENGE THIS RULING AND IT MAY GET OVERRULED]

4

MST AHMADEEN

BEGUM

Vs

ABDUL QAYUM KHAN

2001(90)FLR 348[HC-ALL-SB]

1

CAN THE NOMINEE UTILISE THE PF AMOUNT AS HE LIKES OR IS HE OBLIGED TO PASS IT ON TO TH ELEGAL HEIRS?

1

2

3

SECTION 5 OF THE EPF ACT DOES NOT CONFER ANY BENEFICIAL INTEREST UPON THE NOMINEE

THE NOMINEE HAS NO RIGHT TO APPROPRIATE THE PF OF THE DEAD EMPLOYEE

THE PF AMOUNT WILL FORM PART OF THE ESTATE OF THE DECEASED AND HAS TO BE DISTRIBUTED AMONG THE LEGAL HEIRS.

5

MGMT OF RAM BAGH

PALACE HOTEL

Vs

STATE OR RAJASTHAN

[2000 LLR 1005 [HC-RAJ[OR

KOTARI COLOURING FACTORY VS RPFC 2000 LLR 169 [HC-DEL]BLUE STAR LTD VS SHYAM MAHESWARI

[1998 LLR 984 HC-BOM]

1

WHAT IS THE TEST FOR DETERMINING WHETHER TWO OR MORE UNITS CONSTITUTE ONE SINGLE ESTABLISHMENT FOR COVERAGE UNDER EPF & ESI ACTS?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

THE FACTORS FOR TEST COULD BE :

UNITY OF OWNERSHIP(IE MANAGEMENT & CONTROL)

UNITY OF LABOUR (TRNASFERABILITY OF EMPLOYEES)

GEOGRAPHY (BONAFIDES OF KEEPING THE UNITS APRT/PROXIMITY

SOURCE OF FINANCE (WHETHER FROM SAME  SOURCE)

SUPERVISION AND CONTROL (WHETHER MANAGED BY SAME PERSON)

SERVICE CONDITIONS OF WORKMEN (RULES APPLICABLE ARE SAME)

FUNCTIONAL INTEGRITY (PART & PARCEL OF MAIN UNIT, PRIMARY & SUBSIDIARY, INCIDENTAL)

UNITY OF PURPOSE [INTER-RELATED BUSINESS OR PRODUCTION]

GENERAL (BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS/SIMILARITY OF NOMENCLATURE)

6

BRIJBASI LIME WORKS

Vs

ASST PF COMMISSIONER

JABALPUR

[2001(90)FLR 1060 HC-MP-SB]

1

WHAT IS THE CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING WHETHER AN ESTABLISHMENT HAS COME UNDER THE COVERAGE OF THE EPF ACT 1952

1

  2

A

B

C

COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS ARE SPELT OUT IN SECTION 1(3)(A)AND 1(3)(B)

TO RBING AN ESTABLISHMENT UNDER 1(3)(A)IT MUST BE SHOWN THAT ALL FOLLOWING FOUR REQUIREMENTS ARE MET:

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS A FACTORY

THAT IT IS ENGAGED IN AN INDUSTRY

THE INDUSTRY MUSTBE SPECIFIED IN SCHEDULE-1 OF THE ACT.

3

4

D

IT MUST BE  EMPLOYING 20 OR  MORE PERSONS

UNDER SECTION 1(3)(B)CENTRAL GOVERNMENT CAN EXTEND COVERAGE UNDER THE ACT TO NON-FACTORY ESTABLISHMENTS EVENIF THE ESTABLISHMENT IS  EMPLOYING LESS THAN 20

HOWEVER UNLIKE UNDER 1(3)(A) WHICH IS GENERAL IN NATURE ANY COVERAGE UNDER 1(3)(B) IS POSSIBLE ONLY BY NAMING AN ESTABLISHMENT AN DIT BEING NOTIFIED IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE.

7

RAJENDRA CINEMA

Vs

RPF COMMISSIONER

2002 92)LLJ 24(HC-CAL)

1

   
2

3

THE PETITIONERS CHALLENGED THE GOVT ORDER EXTENDING EPF COVERAGE TO THEATRES EMPLOYING FIVE OR MORE EMPLOYEES.

THE COURT GRANTED AN INTERIM STAY IN FAVOUR OF THE EMPLOYER BUT FINALLY DECIDED AGAINST EMPLOYER

IS EMPLOYER REQUIRED TO PAY BOTH THE EMPLOYERS PLUS EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTIONS FOR THE ENTIRE PAST PERIOD?

1

2

QUOTING THE EARLIER SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT IN UNION OF INDIA VS MURAGAN TALKIES [1996 (1) LLJ 1154 HELD PETITIONER SHOULD: PAY BOTH THE CONTRIBUTIONS FOR THE PERIOD UPTO THE INTERIM STAY ORDER AND

ONLY EMPLOYERS CONTRIBUTION  FROM   DATE OF INTERIM STAY AND FINAL DISPOSAL OF THE CASE

NOTE:

IT MAY BE  NOTED THAT  AS PER  SCHME  952  AN EMPLOYER, CANNOT RECOVER EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION FOR PAST PERIOD FROM FUTURE SALARIES OF EMPLOYEES EXCEPT WHEN DEDUCTIONS COULD NOT BE MADE DUE TO SOME CLERICAL ERROR.

8

FERRO CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION LTD

Vs

RPF COMMISSIONER

2002(I) LLJ 986[HC-MP]OR 2002 (2) LLN 269

1

2

AS PER SECTION 8-F(3) OF THE EPF ACT COMMISSIONER CAN ORDER RECOVERY OF MONIES HELD BY A THIRD PARTY FOR DEFAULT OR PF DUES OF A SECOND PARTY.

CAN  EPF COMMISSIONER ISSUE RECOVERY ORDERS ON THIRD PARTY WITHOUT GIVING THE  THIRD(WHO IS NOT A DEFAULTER)AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD?

1

2

3

SECTIONS 8-F(3) IS SIMILAR TO SECTION 226(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT

EPF COMMISSIONER CANNOT ISSUE RECOVERY ORDERS UNLESS HE GIVES AN OPPORTUNITY TO THIRD PARTY 9HOLDING MONIES OF SECOND PARTY) TO MAKE A STATEMENT UNDER OATH AND GIVES AN ORDER BASED ON THE OATH STATEMENT OF THIRD PARTY.

THIS GIVING OF AN OPPORTUNITY IS MANDATORY AND IF NOT GIVEN WILL VITIATE THE RECOVERY ORDERS.

9

VIKRAM PODDAR

Vs

RPF COMMISSIONER

2001(2) LLJ 518 [HC-CAL]OR

2001/920 LLN 78 AND KANAIYALAL VS RPFC 2002/91 LJ 297 [HC-BOM]

1

WHEN CAN THE RPFC ISSUE ARREST WARRANT UNDER SECTION 8-G AGAINST A DEFAULTER?

1

HE CAN ISSUE ARREST WARRANT WHEN DEFAULTER DISHONESTLY TRANSFERRED OR CONCEALED OR REMOVED ANY PROPERTY AFTER A RECOVERY ORDER SO AS TO OBSTRUCT THE EXECUTION OF RECOVCERY PROCEEDINGS.

10

J ENGG COMPANY VS

ASST PF

COMMISSIONER

2002(I0LLJ 653 [HC- MAD]

1

   



 2

3

4

EPF ACT IS NORMALLY APPLICABLE ONLY TO ESTABLISHMENTS EMPLOYING MORE THAN 20

SECTION 1(4) PROVIDES THAT ON A JOINT APPLICATION BY EMPLOYER AND MAJORITY OF WORKMEN, EPF CAN BE EXTENDED TO ESTABLISHMENTS EMPLOYEING LESS THAN 20

SUCH AN APPLICATION WAS MADE AND LATER WITHDRAWN

AFTER AN YEAR THE REGIONAL PF COMMISSIONER ALLOTTED A CODE NUMBER AND INITIATED ACTION AGAINST COMPANY FOR NON-REMITTANCE OF CONTRIBUTION.IS IT IN ORDER?

1

2

SQUASHING THE PF COMMISSIONERS ORDERS HELD THAT AS PER SECTION 1(4)VOLUNTARY COVERAGE CAN BE APPROVED ONLY BY CENTRAL PF COMMISSIONER AND IT BECOMES EFFECTIVE ONLY AFTER HIS ORDERS ARE PUBLISHED IN THE GAZETTE.

REGIONAL PF COMMISSIONERS ARE NOT EMPOWERED TO ISSUE SUCH ORDERS FOR VOLUNTARY COVERAGE.