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