The nettlesome problem of provident fund for casual construction workers returned to the Delhi High Court with the Builders Association of India and several construction firms alleging that they should not be compelled to pay their contribution because the workers change places and could not be traced. The court had in the past asked the government to put in place a workable scheme to benefit the labourers who change employers and work place very often. Since this has not been done satisfactorily, the employers should not be compelled to contribute to the fund, they argued. The high court dismissed their petitions stating that the problem of logistics in finding the workers and paying them is different from the liability of the employers. The argument that unless the provident fund authorities and the government could show that they had a "mechanism as per which the workmen whose job was portable could avail the benefit of the money lying to their credit all over India, no liability could be fastened upon the firms has no legs to stand on."
The hon'ble court also said - " Before concluding we would note that the learned Single Judge has rightly observed that the liability of the employer to make a deduction from the wage payable to an employee and with a matching contribution deposit the amount with the Provident Fund Commissioner is unconnected with how the employee can receive the benefit of the fund. The issue of portability of workmen and how could a workman withdraw money lying to his credit in the fund did trouble the Division Bench of this Court because of the logistics problem which a workman could face. But that was dehors the liability of the employer to do the needful by complying with the employer’s obligation as per the amended scheme. The scheme has been upheld by the Supreme Court. "
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment Reserved on: October 08, 2015
Judgment Delivered on: October 16,2015
+ LPA 727/2014
M/S SDB INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.
(FORMERLY SOMDATT
BUILDERS PVT. LTD.) & ORS. .....Appellants
Represented by: Mr.Rakesh Tiku, Sr.Advocate
instructed by Mr.Jeevesh Nagrath and
Mr.Rajeshwar K.Gupta, Advocates
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Represented by: Mr.Jasmeet Singh, Advocate with
Ms.Ashta Sharma, Advocate for R-1
Mr.R.C.Chawla, Advocate for Central
PF Commissioner
LPA 728/2014
BUILDERS ASSOCIATION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Appellants
Represented by: Mr.Rakesh Tiku, Sr.Advocate
instructed by Mr.Jeevesh Nagrath and
Mr.Rajeshwar K.Gupta, Advocates
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Represented by: Mr.Ruchir Mishra, Advocate for R-1
Mr.R.C.Chawla, Advocate for Central
PF Commissioner
LPA No.727/2014 & conn.matters Page 2 of 26
LPA 729/2014
M/S SDB INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.
(FORMERLY SOMDATT
BUILDERS PVT. LTD.) & ORS. .....Appellants
Represented by: Mr.Rakesh Tiku, Sr.Advocate
instructed by Mr.Jeevesh Nagrath and
Mr.Rajeshwar K.Gupta, Advocates
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Represented by: Mr.Jasmeet Singh, Advocate with
Ms.Ashta Sharma, Advocate for R-1
Mr.R.C.Chawla, Advocate for Central
PF Commissioner
LPA 730/2014
SKYLINE ENGINEERING CONTRACTS
(INDIA) PVT. LTD. .....Appellant
Represented by: Mr.Rakesh Tiku, Sr.Advocate
instructed by Mr.Jeevesh Nagrath and
Mr.Rajeshwar K.Gupta, Advocates
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Represented by: Mr.Jasmeet Singh, Advocate with
Ms.Ashta Sharma, Advocate for R-1
Mr.R.C.Chawla, Advocate for Central
PF Commissioner
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
The hon'ble court also said - " Before concluding we would note that the learned Single Judge has rightly observed that the liability of the employer to make a deduction from the wage payable to an employee and with a matching contribution deposit the amount with the Provident Fund Commissioner is unconnected with how the employee can receive the benefit of the fund. The issue of portability of workmen and how could a workman withdraw money lying to his credit in the fund did trouble the Division Bench of this Court because of the logistics problem which a workman could face. But that was dehors the liability of the employer to do the needful by complying with the employer’s obligation as per the amended scheme. The scheme has been upheld by the Supreme Court. "
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment Reserved on: October 08, 2015
Judgment Delivered on: October 16,2015
+ LPA 727/2014
M/S SDB INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.
(FORMERLY SOMDATT
BUILDERS PVT. LTD.) & ORS. .....Appellants
Represented by: Mr.Rakesh Tiku, Sr.Advocate
instructed by Mr.Jeevesh Nagrath and
Mr.Rajeshwar K.Gupta, Advocates
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Represented by: Mr.Jasmeet Singh, Advocate with
Ms.Ashta Sharma, Advocate for R-1
Mr.R.C.Chawla, Advocate for Central
PF Commissioner
LPA 728/2014
BUILDERS ASSOCIATION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Appellants
Represented by: Mr.Rakesh Tiku, Sr.Advocate
instructed by Mr.Jeevesh Nagrath and
Mr.Rajeshwar K.Gupta, Advocates
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Represented by: Mr.Ruchir Mishra, Advocate for R-1
Mr.R.C.Chawla, Advocate for Central
PF Commissioner
LPA No.727/2014 & conn.matters Page 2 of 26
LPA 729/2014
M/S SDB INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.
(FORMERLY SOMDATT
BUILDERS PVT. LTD.) & ORS. .....Appellants
Represented by: Mr.Rakesh Tiku, Sr.Advocate
instructed by Mr.Jeevesh Nagrath and
Mr.Rajeshwar K.Gupta, Advocates
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Represented by: Mr.Jasmeet Singh, Advocate with
Ms.Ashta Sharma, Advocate for R-1
Mr.R.C.Chawla, Advocate for Central
PF Commissioner
LPA 730/2014
SKYLINE ENGINEERING CONTRACTS
(INDIA) PVT. LTD. .....Appellant
Represented by: Mr.Rakesh Tiku, Sr.Advocate
instructed by Mr.Jeevesh Nagrath and
Mr.Rajeshwar K.Gupta, Advocates
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Represented by: Mr.Jasmeet Singh, Advocate with
Ms.Ashta Sharma, Advocate for R-1
Mr.R.C.Chawla, Advocate for Central
PF Commissioner
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
Comments
Post a Comment