The court determined that pygmy agents do not qualify as employees under the EPF Act, as there is no employer-employee relationship, thus the Act is not applicable.

JUDGMENT :

(M.S. JAWALKAR, J.)

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard learned Counsel for both the parties.

2. The present petition is filed by the petitioner which is a registered cooperative society covered under the provision of Employment Provident Fund Act, 1952 (for brevity ‘the EPF Act’) and the provision under the PF code No. NA/NAG/18860 with effect from 01.11.1978. The bank is regulated by the Banking Regulation Act 1949 and is also registered under Co-operative Societies Act. The petitioner filed the present petition as it is aggrieved by the impugned order passed in Diary No.96/2019 by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Nagpur on 28.12.2023 in the matter of proceedings under Section 7-A (i)(a) of the EPF Act, by which it is held that the provisions of Section 6 of the EPF Act are applicable to the present petitioner. The petitioner has preferred the statutory appeal under section 7-A (i)(a) of the EPF Act before the Central Government, Industrial Tribunal, Nagpur, (CGIT) (Appellate Tribunal), on 11.03.2024, which is pending for want of Presiding Officer. Therefore, the present petition is filed.

3. It is contention of the petitioner that the impugned order dated 28.12.2023, the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Nagpur held that the provision of Section 6 of the EPF Act are applicable to the petitioner. It is erroneously held that the Pygmy Agents or Daily Deposit Collectors who are working as Commission Agents, getting the commission from the bank are in fact eligible for the advantages of the EPF Act. It is further held that the bank has “Master-Servant” or “employer-employee” relationship with the pygmy agents. It is contended that the said observation and finding are absolutely illegal in the light of the settled position of law. Petitioner was issued notice for determination of dues in respect of Daily Deposit Collectors or pygmy agents on 12.01.2009. The petitioner challenged the said notice by filing Writ Petition No.1106/2009 before this Court. There was stay to the “coercive recovery” of the amount determined by the Provident Fund Commissioner in section 7-A enquiry proceedings. After completion of enquiry under Section 7-A (i)(a) of the EPF Act an assessment to the tune of Rs.1,13,38,749/- was made for the period from 1976/77 to 2009/2010, vide order dated 01.07.2010. The Writ Petition No.1106/2009, decided on 25.04.2019 and the order passed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Nagpur came to be quashed and set aside and remanded the matter back to the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Nagpur for holding fresh enquiry based on parameters laid down by the division bench of the Bombay High Court in the review case of Pachora Peoples Cooperative Bank Limited Versus EPFO in Writ Petition No.5086/2011 decided on 07.02.2014.

4. It is submitted that the impugned order by PF Commissioner is not in accordance with the judgment passed by this Court in Pachora Peoples Bank in Writ Petition No.5086/2011 . It is submitted that as per the direction, fresh enquiry was directed to be conducted. Therefore, notice was issued to the petitioner on 28.05.2019, which was duly replied. It is submitted that there is no relation between employer and employee between the bank and Daily Collectors. The nature of Daily Collection Agent is that of a Commission Agents only and they are being paid commission on the basis on the deposit collected by them in the percentage, which is revised from time to time. By no stretch of imagination, these daily collection agents are the employees of the bank and there is no employer-employee relationship. As per the nature of the work, t