Bombay High Court
K.S.T.C.Ltd.
Versus
Asst. P.R. Commr., Goa
Decided On:

Headnote:Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952

       Section 2-A-Scope-Unless there is functional integrality of two units or dependence of one unit on the other to such an extent that if one was closed it will mean automatically closure of the other Section 2-A could not be said to be covered.- The petitioner company utilised the services of the workshop of M/s Kadamba Transport Limited, a Government Company on payment basis and made payments for spares and other services made available during breakdown of the buses. The petitioner took buses from Kadamba Transport Ltd. in case of breakdown but paid hire charges for the same. It could not be said that the petitioner company was dependent on KTC to the extent that if KTC closed down, the petitioner company would not be able to survive. Unless there was functional integrality of the two units or dependence of the company to such an extent that if the other is closed it will mean automatically closure of the company in question the said company cannot be said to be covered under Section 2-A of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1998 (1) LLJ 1060 (SC)-Relied on.

       For Citation : 1999 (3) Mh LJ 306 (Bom)