1. Dispute over dues of employees of State-owned corporations after Bihar reorganisation — Implementation of Committee recommendations. (Para 2 , 3 )
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
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 )
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 )
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 )
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 )
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 )
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
Kapila Hingorani v. State of Bihar
Arcot Textile Mills Ltd. v. Regl. Provident Fund Commissioner & Ors.
Central Bank of India v. Ravindra & Ors.
Regl. Provident Fund Commr. v. S.D. College
Regl. Provident Fund Commr. v. Hooghly Mills Co. Ltd.
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.