MANAGEMENT OF TRIDENT FACILITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner company is an establishment covered under Sec. 1(3)(b) of The Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the EPF Act'). When the second respondent had alleged that the establishment had failed to remit the Provident Fund and insurance contribution dues for the period from May, 2010 to November, 2012, an enquiry was initiated under Sec. 7A of the EPF Act on 1/2/2012. In the enquiry, it was found that the establishment was remitting the Provident Fund contributions only on the basic component of the wages from 04/2010 and the wages have been split into Basic, House Rent Allowance (HRA) and Over Time Allowance (OTA), which do not attract Employees Provident Fund (EPF) contributions.

(2.) Alleging that the establishment was avoiding liability towards the contributions by making contributions on splitting up the wages into Basic and HRA components, the second respondent herein had examined the rate of minimum wages for hospital, sweet making and confectioneries, nursing home, shop and commercial establishment, in which, the petitioners were deploying their manpower and by applying the minimum wages notified to such establishments, had determined the contributions payable by the establishment on the basis of the notified minimum wages and sought for payment of the balance of the EPF contributions, through the impugned order dtd. 13/8/2013. The appeal filed by the petitioner before the Employees' Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal was also rejected, through an order dtd. 8/1/2014, by holding that, splitting up of the minimum wages into Basic Wage, Dearness Allowance and OTA was invalid, since the State Government had notified the minimum wages for the concerned establishments. Challenging these orders, the present writ petition has been filed.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the definition of Basic Wages under Sec. 2(b) read with Sec. 6 of the EPF Act does not include HRA and OTA and therefore, the second respondent herein had exceeded his jurisdiction in directing the petitioner to pay the contributions on such allowances also. He further submitted that placing reliance on the minimum wages notified by the Government to the establishments, where their manpower were engaged and deriving at the EPF contributions, is impermissible in the absence of any provisions. In support of such a claim, the learned counsel placed reliance on a judgement of the Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner vs. M/s.G4S Security Services (India) Ltd. And another reported in 2011 SCC OnLine P&H 8362.