In Brief
The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner sought contributions from a State Warehousing Corporation for workers engaged in loading and unloading commodities in its godowns. The Corporation disputed liability, relying on a finding from earlier Industrial Disputes Act proceedings that the workers were not its employees. The High Court allowed the Corporation's writ petition. The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred by borrowing findings from Industrial Disputes Act proceedings instead of independently applying the definition of 'employee' under Section 2(f) of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The Court set aside the High Court's order and remanded for fresh decision based on the statutory definition governing provident fund eligibility.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.