Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 20 (0.53 seconds)Section 7A in Employees Provident Funds Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 [Entire Act]
The Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948
The Apprentices Act, 1961
Steel Authority Of India Ltd. & Ors. ... vs National Union Water Front Workers & Ors on 30 August, 2001
However, need is not felt to delve deeper on this aspect in as much as the Supreme
Court recently vide order dated 28th July, 2009 in Civil Appeal 7482 of 2003 titled
Food Corporation of India Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner has held
that the definition of employee in Section 2(f) of EPF Act has to be read in the
light of decision of Constitution Bench in Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs.
National Union Waterfront Workers (2001) 7 SCC 1.
Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd vs Esi Corporation on 14 February, 2008
It was also held that what
had been held in Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. Vs. ESI Corporation (2008) 3
SCC 247 in relation to ESI Act, applies to proceedings under the EPF Act also, i.e.
in case of employees engaged through contractor, before determination by the
Authorities under the Act, notice is required to be issued to the contractor. In the
present case also, no notice was issued to the canteen and the cycle stand
contactor. In fact, it was / is one of the pleas of petitioners before RPFC as well as
before this Court they had no inkling whatsoever of the employees if any of
canteen and cycle stand and Sh. P.C. Mathur and Sh. Ram Kishan should be
summoned.
International Airport Authority Of ... vs International Air Cargo Workers' ... on 13 April, 2009
14. The other test formulated in the International Airport Authority (supra)
was of camouflage. In my view, the definition of employee in the EPF Act
particularly, the part "employed by or through a contractor in or in connection
with the work of the establishment" has to be read in the same light. The
legislative intent appears to be to pierce manipulations by the employer who by
creating a facade are depriving the workmen of the benefits of the legislation.
Where it is found that though the cinema itself is running a canteen or a cycle
stand but to deprive the employees engaged for the said purposes of the benefits of
the social welfare legislation, a contractor has been introduced as an intermediary
and/or a labour contractor to provide the workmen only has been used, the courts
would certainly hold the said employees to be employees of the cinema. However
where the cinema has engaged an expert for providing the amenity of canteen and
the facility of parking and such expert brings his/its own workforce, then the said
workmen cannot be treated as the employees of the cinema.
Royal Talkies, Hyderabad & Ors vs Employees State Insurance Corp on 9 August, 1978
It is also contended that the definition of an employee
in Section 2(f) of the Act is intended to cover the case of a contract labour and
does not apply to an independent contractor as the aforesaid Sh. P.C. Mathur and
Sh. Ram Kishan were. It is thus urged that the order of RPFC applying the Act to
the petitioners qua the canteen and the cycle stand workers is erroneous and liable
to be set aside. Alternatively, it is contended that the petitioners were not given
any opportunity to establish their case. It is also urged that the Supreme Court in
Royal Talkies (supra) was swayed by the factual position of the cinema paying the
electricity charges in respect of the canteen and the canteen being run only during
the hours of the shows in the cinema. It is contended that the factual position with
respect to the canteen & cycle stand in Novelty Cinema was different; however the
petitioners were deprived of an opportunity to demonstrate the same. It is urged
that the proceedings were midway when the same were adjourned sine die owing
to Section 7-A being declared ultra vires by this Court. However no opportunity to
complete the proceedings was furnished after the proceedings were revived. The
senior counsel thus contends that if this Court is not inclined to quash the orders,
the matter be remanded for fresh determination.