OF 16 FULL JUDGMENTS OF SUPREME COURT AND

HIGH COURTS ON EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT

FUND AS PUBLISHED IN NOVEMBER 2023 ISSUE OF
THE LABOUR LAW REPORTER
Ÿ Assessing contributions for unidentified employees is untenable. (Himachal Pradesh HC)
Ÿ Denial of opportunity for cross-examination of the Enforcement Officer is illegal.(Madras HC)
Ÿ Clubbing of units of two different owners is invalid.(Karnataka HC)
Ÿ The actual employer is to be summoned during 7A proceedings.(Orissa HC)
Ÿ No EPF liability without determining employer-employee relationship. (Himachal Pradesh HC)
Ÿ Principal/Vice Principal, not drawing any wages, are not employees under the EPF Act.(Bombay
HC)
Ÿ Prescribed imposition of penalty is not necessary. (Madras HC)
Ÿ EPF deposit can be affected only on a date following the national holiday.(Delhi HC)
Ÿ An ex-parte award not based on facts is illegal. (Madras HC)
Ÿ Instalments are to be allowed on the demise of the proprietor and financial crisis. (Jharkhand
HC)
Ÿ Order by Tribunal without territorial jurisdiction is unsustainable.(Chhattisgarh HC)
Ÿ Belated deposit of damages can be reduced when not deliberate.(Madras HC)
Ÿ PF Authority's order neglecting employer's grievance is unsustainable. (Orissa HC)
Ÿ The drivers of buses hired through contractors will be covered under the EPF Act.(Bombay HC)
Ÿ Exemption is permissible only to already covered establishments.(Calcutta HC)
Ÿ No limitation in imposing damages and interest for delayed deposit of PF dues. (Telangana HC)
Ÿ Judicial review permissible only against decision making process and not the decision.(Calcutta
HC)
Ÿ Failure to remit instalments timely will merit coercive action.(Jharkhand HC)
Ÿ Press release as an advisory on a policy decision not binding.(Delhi HC)

LABOUR LAW REPORTER

A-43, Lajpat Nagar-2, New Delhi-110024. Mob.: +919891114444, +918468000000
Email : info@labourlawreporter.com Website: www.labourlawreporter.com