GYAN BHARTI Vs. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated February 28, 1996 passed in C.O. No. 14917 (W) of 1992 passed by ASHOK KUMAR CHAKRABORTY (as His Lordship then was) dismissing the writ petition holding inter alia, that the School management was liable to pay the statutory liability of making payment of provident fund in accordance with the provisions of Section 6 of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act in respect of Dearness Allowances paid by the Government to the School Authorities for payment to the teaching and non-teaching staff of the School concerned.

(2.) It is not in dispute that the petitioner is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act and runs and manages an Educational Institution known as Gyan Bharati Vidyapith and the staff of the said School receive Government Dearness Allowance from the District Inspector of Schools (Secondary Education) at the Government prescribed rate. The question that falls for our determination in this appeal is whether the Managing Committee of the School is liable to pay to the provident fund for that part of the Dearness Allowance which is contributed and given by the State as an aid to the Educational Institution. It is not in dispute that the Managing Committee of the said school is paying and it is admitted by the petitioners that they are liable to pay provident fund and they are paying provident fund on the salary and that part of the Dearness Allowance which is being paid by the Managing Committee but their case is that they are not liable to pay the provident fund in respect of that part of the Dearness Allowance which is sanctioned and granted by way of an aid by the Government under certain schemes which have been framed by the Government for the purpose of giving certain reliefs and/or mitigate the hardship of this Institution in the matter of paying Dearness Allowance at the Government rate.

(3.) Mr. Bhaskar Gupta, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner appellant submitted that the Managing Committee of the School cannot be made liable to make payment of the provident funds is respect of the Dearness Allowance paid by the Government to the teachers through the Managing Committee of the said School. There is no doubt that the appellant has been regularly making all contributions towards provident funds of the teaching and non-teaching staff of the said School on salary and other emoluments paid by the appellant to the concerned staff. The Provident Fund Authorities issued a notice upon the Managing Committee requiring it to make payment of the provident funds in respect of that part of the Dearness Allowance which was paid by the Government and against that notice, the appellant moved the Writ Court. Upon hearing the parties the learned Single Judge by an order dated February 28, 1996 dismissed the said writ petition. Mr. Gupta submitted that the provisions of Section 6 of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) has to be construed keeping in mind the provisions of Section 2(b) of the Act which defines basic wages. Section 6 of the said Act provides for liability to make payment and the same is the charging section under which the provident funds are required to be paid which are as follows: