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

2005 Supreme(Cal) 17

D.K.SETH, RAJENDRA NATH SINHA
REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER (II), WEST BENGAL – Appellant
Versus
VIVEKANANDA VIDYAMANDIR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Shayamal Sarkar

D. K. SETH, J.

( 1 ) THE learned Counsel for the appellant produces a copy of the letter showing service upon the respondents along with a receipt of Speed post. Let the same be taken on record. The question: the only question involved in this case is as to whether the special allowance, in the facts and circumstances of this case, could be treated as part of the basic wages or dearness allowance in the garb of a nomenclature of special allowance subject to the contribution towards Provident Fund under section 6 of the employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (1952 Act ). The order appealed against:

( 2 ) THE learned Single Judge, relying on a decision in Regional Commissioner, epf, Tamil Nadu and Pondichery vs. Management of Southern Alloy/ Foundries (P) Ltd. , 1982 (1) LLJ 28, was pleased to hold that the special allowance could neither be included in the basic wages nor could it be treated as dearness allowance and, therefore, was pleased to set aside the order passed by the regional Commissioner, Employees' Provident Fund holding special allowance as dearness allowance. The appellants' contention:

( 3 ) THE learned Counsel for the appellants pointed out





Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top