Back
DEEPAK KHOT
Madhya Pradesh Housing and Infrastructure Development Board Established Under the M. P. Griha Nirman – Appellant
Versus
Regional Provident Fund Commissioner II Jabalpur – Respondent
ORDER
1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs :--
“(i) Call for the records pertaining to the case.
(ii) Set aside the impugned order dated 15.6.2022 passed by the learned Central Government Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court/EPF Appellate Tribunal, Jabalpur in Case No.CGIT/LC/EPFA-59-2019;
(iii) Hold that the EPF Act is not applicable to the petitioner;
(iv) Any other appropriate writ/order/direction, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fir and proper also kindly be issued in the interest of justice.”
2. Short facts giving rise to the present petition are that one complaint has been filed to the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Jabalpur (for brevity, the ‘RPFC’) on 15.9.2006 (Annexure-A/2). On the said complaint, notices have been issued on 24.4.2007. The petitioner had submitted objection in response to the notice on 25.6.2007. The RPFC passed an order holding that the EPF is applicable vide order dated 21.7.2010. Again objections were submitted vide objection dated 17.8.2010 in regard to the applicability of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 195
Trainees under certified standing orders are excluded from the definition of 'employee' under the EPF Act unless they perform the same work as regular employees.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the authority of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner to decide the entitlement of an employee to become a member and the date from which the e....
Point of Law : There is no requirement for this Court to intercede in the matter - There are no grounds made out in the petition. [Para 11.1]
The Appellate Tribunal rightly limited Provident Fund coverage to canteen employees, confirming that casual and contract workers lack a defined employment connection under the Employees Provident Fun....
Casual employees of OUAT are entitled to EPF and ESI benefits as per statutory provisions, despite management's failure to enroll them, requiring implementation within three months.
The burden of proof lies on the establishment to demonstrate the status of reported persons as employees or apprentices, and a clear training scheme is required for trainees under certified standing ....
The court clarified the application of the EPF Act regarding employee classification and highlighted the importance of natural justice in administrative proceedings.
An employee of a wholly owned subsidiary is entitled to provident fund benefits from the date of appointment, despite the subsidiary's later voluntary coverage under the EPF Act.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
