Common control and functional unity brought franchisee workers within provident fund coverage under the employment law framework.

Franchisee and service-agent arrangements were treated as part of the principal establishment under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 because the materials showed overall financial and operational control, common records, mandatory remittance of collections, stationery supply, and restricted autonomy. The enquiry under Section 7A found unity of management, functional integrity and unity of purpose, and the workers were held to fall within the definition of employee under Section 2(f), bringing the establishment within Section 2A coverage. The High Court upheld the finding that the employees of those agencies were covered employees under the Act.

---

---

Issues: Whether the franchisee/service agents were branches of the petitioner's establishment so as to attract coverage under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, and whether the authorities were justified in holding that the employees of those agencies were to be treated as employees of the petitioner.

Analysis: The enquiry under Section 7A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 examined the agency agreements, accounts and records to ascertain the real nature of the working arrangement. The materials showed that the petitioner retained overall financial and operational control: the agencies were required to remit collections to the petitioner, use stationery supplied by the petitioner, maintain records for the petitioner's verification, and operate only within the limits imposed by the petitioner. The accounts also indicated that the service agents had no independent source of income and that wages and expenses of the agents' staff were met from amounts received from the petitioner. On these facts, the arrangement disclosed unity of management and control, functional integrity and unity of purpose, bringing the workers within the statutory definition of employee under Section 2(f) and the establishment within the coverage of Section 2A.

Conclusion: The finding that the service agents formed part of the petitioner's establishment and that the employees working under them were covered employees under the Act was upheld, and the writ petition failed.

---