SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(SC) 1191

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
VIKRAM NATH, SANDEEP MEHTA, JJ.
Bihar State Ardh Sarkari Arajpati Karamchari Maha Sangh And Others - Petitioners
Versus
State Of Bihar And Others – Respondents
Writ Petition (Civil) No(s). 932 of 2022
Decided On : 28-09-2026

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For Petitioner(s):Ms. Priya Hingorani, Sr. Adv. Ms. Shweta Hingorani, Adv. Mr. Naseem Ahmed, Adv. Ms. Aditi Ladda, Adv. Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad- 1864, AOR Mr. Sudesh Desai, Adv. For Respondent(s):Mr. Arunabh Chowdhury, Sr. Adv. Ms. Pallavi Langar, AOR Ms. Pragya Baghel, Adv. Mr. Sujeet Kumar Chaubey, Adv. Ms. Anushka Raghunath, Adv. Mr. Manish Kumar, AOR Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Sanjeev Malhotra, AOR Mr. Bhaskar Aditya, AOR

Statutory interest under Section 7-Q of the EPF Act is mandatory. Furthermore, prolonged deprivation of lawful salary dues warrants compensatory interest regardless of the employer's corporate personality, and static historical wage rates for daily-wagers over decades may be balanced by one-time monetary compensation.

Headnote:(A) Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 - Section 7-Q - Statutory interest on delayed provident fund dues - Simple interest at 12% per annum is a mandatory statutory consequence of delay in discharge of obligations, intended to provide financial security as a measure of social security and serves a beneficial social-welfare purpose (Paras 44, 46, 48).

(B) Interest on delayed payment of salary/wages - Compensation for deprivation of use of money - Interest represents recompense for the loss occasioned by being kept out of the use of money lawfully due. Where delay is extraordinary and extends over decades, reasonable compensatory interest is warranted to ensure legitimate entitlements do not become illusory, regardless of the separate juristic personality of the defunct corporate body from the State (Paras 50-53).

(C) Daily-wage employees - Fairness in monetary entitlement - Applying a static historical wage rate over several decades, irrespective of cost of living or statutory wage revisions, is not a fair or reasonable measure of monetary entitlement. To balance equities and avoid further prolonged litigation, a one-time lump sum may be awarded as compensation for such deprivation (Paras 39-42).

Facts of the case:
Following the reorganization of a State and the creation of a new State, liabilities and service-related claims of employees of five defunct State-owned corporations remained unresolved. While substantial principal dues were disbursed to verified employees, issues remained regarding the identification of untraceable employees, the adequacy of the flat daily-wage rate used for computations for daily-wagers, and the entitlement to and rate of interest on delayed payments of salaries and provident fund contributions.

Findings of Court:
(i) The exercise for identification of remaining employees stands closed, but claimants have 12 months to approach nodal officers for verification and disbursement. (ii) Daily-wage employees are entitled to a one-time sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- in addition to disbursed dues to compensate for the static wage rate used. (iii) Statutory simple interest at 12% per annum is payable on EPF dues under Section 7-Q of the Act from the date the amount became due. (iv) Simple interest at 6% per annum is payable on salary/wages and other monetary dues from the date they became due until actual payment.

Issues: (i) Whether the claims of untraceable employees are extinguished; (ii) whether a flat historical wage rate for daily-wagers is fair and if one-time compensation is warranted; (iii) whether interest is payable on delayed salary and EPF dues and at what rate.

Ratio Decidendi: Statutory interest under Section 7-Q of the EPF Act is a mandatory liability arising by operation of law. For non-statutory dues, interest serves as an equitable recompense for the deprivation of the use of money. The state's obligation as a welfare provider outweighs the corporate veil of defunct state-owned entities when employees are deprived of lawful dues for decades.

Result: Writ petition disposed of with directions for payment of interest and one-time compensation.

Legal Category Hierarchy

  • administrative law
    • public law remedy
      • compensation for constitutional deprivation (Para 14)
    • state instrumentalities
      • liability of defunct corporations (Para 53)
  • labour and employment
    • daily-wage workers
      • entitlement to wages (Para 36, 37, 38, 39, 40)
      • compensation for delayed payment (Para 41, 42)
    • provident fund
      • statutory interest on delayed dues (Para 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48)
    • salary and wages
  • practice and procedure
    • compliance and implementation
      • identification and verification of claimants (Para 33, 34, 35, 59)
    • public notice and transparency
      • publication of claimant particulars (Para 59)
  • constitutional law
    • fundamental rights
      • right to life and dignity (article 21) (Para 14)

Table of Contents

1. Dispute over dues of employees of State-owned corporations after Bihar reorganisation — Implementation of Committee recommendations. (Para 2 , 3 )

2. Claims for interest on delayed dues and compensation for daily-wagers contested by States citing separate corporate identity and no-work-no-pay. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 )

3. Prolonged deprivation of lawful dues warrants compensatory interest; daily-wage calculation at a fixed static rate over decades is unfair. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 )

4. Statutory interest under Section 7-Q, EPF Act is mandatory on delayed provident fund dues; interest on other delayed dues is compensatory. (Para 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 50 , 51 , 52 )

5. States directed to pay 12% interest on delayed EPF dues, 6% on other dues, and a one-time sum to daily-wagers. (Para 59 , 62 )

6. Is interest on delayed EPF dues mandatory under Section 7-Q of the EPF Act?

Yes, Section 7-Q mandates simple interest at 12% per annum from the date the amount became due until actual payment, as a statutory liability. (Para 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 )

7. Can the separate corporate personality of defunct State-owned corporations shield the State from liability for their employees' dues?

No, in extraordinary circumstances of prolonged deprivation, the State as a welfare entity cannot allow corporate form to render employees' legitimate rights illusory. (Para 53 )

8. Is a daily-wage workman entitled to compensation for delayed wages calculated at a static daily rate over decades?

A fixed static daily rate over decades is unfair. The court directed a one-time sum of Rs.1,00,000 per daily-wager as equitable compensation. (Para 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 )

9. What rate of interest is applicable on delayed payment of salary and non-EPF monetary dues?

Simple interest at 6% per annum from the date the amount became due until actual payment, as a compensatory measure for prolonged deprivation. (Para 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 )

10. Does the closure of identification and verification proceedings extinguish the underlying entitlement of untraced employees?

No. The closure does not extinguish the entitlement; employees or legal heirs may approach the Nodal Officer within 12 months for verification and payment. (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 59 )

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Mehta, J.

For ease of reference, this judgment is divided into the following sections:

INDEX

A.

BACKGROUND

6.1.

THE APPORTIONMENT AND FIXATION OF THE INTER-SE LIABILITY OF THE RESPECTIVE STATES

6.2.

PAY REVISION COMMISSION

6.3.

THE DETERMINATION, COMPUTATION AND DISBURSAL OF DUES PAYABLE TOWARDS EMPLOYEES’ PROVIDENT FUND CONTRIBUTIONS

B.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS

I.

THE IDENTIFICATION AND VERIFICATION OF THE REMAINING EMPLOYEES/WORKMEN

II.

DAILY-WAGERS’ ENTITLEMENT AND WELFARE/DEATH COMPENSATION

III.

ENTITLEMENT TO AND RATE OF INTEREST ON DELAYED PAYMENTS

C.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT-STATES

I.

THE IDENTIFICATION AND VERIFICATION OF THE REMAINING EMPLOYEES/WORKMEN

II.

DAILY-WAGERS’ ENTITLEMENT AND WELFARE/DEATH COMPENSATION

III.

ENTITLEMENT TO AND RATE OF INTEREST ON DELAYED PAYMENTS

D.

ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

I.

THE IDENTIFICATION AND VERIFICATION OF THE REMAINING EMPLOYEES/WORKMEN

II.

DAILY-WAGERS’ ENTITLEMENT AND WELFARE/DEATH COMPENSATION

III.

ENTITLEMENT TO AND RATE OF INTEREST ON DELAYED PAYMENTS

a.

Interest on delayed payment of EPF dues

b.

Interest on delayed payment of salary/wages

E.

CONCLUSION AND DIRECTIONS

1. Heard.

A. BACKGROUND

2. The present proceedings have their genesis in the reorganisation of the erstwhile State of Bihar pursuant to the Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000. The reorganisation of the erstwhile State of Bihar, pursuant to which the State of Jharkhand came to be constituted, gave rise, inter alia, to questions concerning the apportionment and discharge of liabilities, dues and service-related claims of the employees/workmen of five State-owned inter-State corporations, namely, Bihar State Construction Corporation Ltd. 1[For Short, “BSCCL”.]; Bihar State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. 2[For Short, “BSIDC”.]; Bihar State Electronic Development Corporation Ltd.3[For Short, “BSEDC”.]; Bihar State Forest Development Corporation Ltd.4[For Short, “BSFDC”.]; and Bihar State Panchayati Raj Financial Corporation Ltd.5[For Short, “BPRFC”.]. The controversy, which has its roots in the statutory reorganisation, has since traversed a long and chequered course, necessitating successive rounds of judicial intervention and administrative consideration.

3. The history of the litigation, including the proceedings in Kapila Hingorani v. State of Bihar, (2003) 6 SCC 1 the subsequent adjudication in relation to the inter-State liabilities, and the constitution and functioning of the Committee under the Chairmanship of Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, Judge (Retd.), Supreme Court of India,7[Hereinafter, referred to as “the Committee”.] has been noticed and dealt with in extenso by this Court in its order dated 29th May, 2026. In view of the detailed consideration already undertaken therein, we do not deem it necessary to once again recapitulate the entire course of the litigation. The said order constitutes the backdrop against which the issues presently arising for consideration are required to be examined.

4. By the order dated 29th May, 2026, this Court considered the Final Report dated 30th April, 2026 submitted by the Committee, and accepted its recommendations to the extent indicated in paragraph 37 of the said order. The effect of the said order was to bring finality to the matters in respect of which the recommendations of the Committee were accepted, leaving no room for those issues to be reopened in future.

5. Pursuant to the order dated 29th May, 2026, the States of Bihar and Jharkhand have filed their respective compliance affidavits in August, 2026, reporting compliance with the directions issued by this Court and the disbursement of the principal dues to the identified and verified employees/workmen of the five Corporations. The affidavits set out the corporation-wise position of payments made by t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top