Central Board Of Trustee, v. The Presiding Officer,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 05.04.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY Central Board of Trustee, Employees Provident Fund Organization, Represented by, The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Regional Office, Bhavishyanidhi Bhavan, Lady Dock College Road, Madurai-625 002. ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Presiding Officer, The Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal , New Delhi.

2.Vishnu Fabrics, Agraharam Village, Thadicombu(PO), Dindigul. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent dated 17.02.2014 in ATA No.637(13) 2013 and quash the same as illegal, unconstitutional and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to pay the contribution of Rs.8,46,946/- 1/5

vide proceedings of the petitioner dated 08.08.2013 in No.TN/42328/MDU/Enf. B/circle 31/31044/2013 within a time frame as may be fixed by the Court. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Muralisankar For R-1 : Presiding Officer For R-2 : Mr.M.Elanchezhian

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed challenging the order, dated 17.02.2014 with a consequential direction to the 1st respondent to pay the contribution of Rs.8,46,946/- vide proceedings of this petitioner dated 08.08.2013.

2. The second respondent is a Textile Mill where the Textile Mill has paid allowances to some of the persons and not universally. The payment is made under the heads of Meals, Conveyancing and Washing. The petitioner's organization is of the view that since all the allowances under the heads of Meals, Conveyance and washing are paid universally, the second respondent is bound to include the said allowances along with the basic wages and remit the provident fund to the said allowances. But the contention of the second respondent is that 2/5

Meals is exempted under 2(b) of the EPF and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, where the provisions specifically states that cash value of food is exempted. Therefore, the EPF organization cannot include the said components along with the basis wages. As far as conveyance is concerned, the same is not paid to all the workers, but paid only to the "workers" not to the "administrative staffs". Therefore, it is not paid universally. As far as the washing is concerned, it is paid to Watch and Ward, Fitter, Electrician and Mechanical workers and admittedly, it is not paid to the administrative staffs but only to certain people, hence, it is not paid universally. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the contention of the petitioner's organization is erroneous. The Tribunal has come to the right conclusion. Hence, the EPF organisation has not raised any legally valid ground to interfere with the Tribunal order.

3. The respondent counsel further submitted that even in the sister concerned of the second respondent Organization, the EPF authorities have not included these factors, but have included the aforesaid components only to the second respondent establishment alone. Hence, this Court is of the considered opinion that the EPF authorities have erred by including the components in the 3/5

basic wages and the Tribunal have rightly allowed the petition filed by the establishment.

4. Hence, the Writ Petition filed by the EPF organization is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Index : Yes / No 05.04.2023 Internet : Yes ksa 4/5

S.SRIMATHY, J ksa Order made in W.P.(MD)No. 12973 of 2018 05.04.2023 5/5