https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297406 Contract employees were treated as covered employees under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act because the definition of employee extended to persons engaged through contractors and the Act was construed liberally as social welfare legislation. The Court noted that the statutory exclusions in relation to government establishments did not apply, and that the respondent's trust regulations could not defeat statutory protection where contract workers were denied both trust and statutory benefits. Relying on governmental correspondence indicating provident fund coverage for contractual and casual workers, the Court directed extension of provident fund benefits under the Act to the petitioner's members and similarly situated contract employees. en-us Wed, 12 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Sep 2021 22:51:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297406 Contract employees were treated as covered employees under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act because the definition of employee extended to persons engaged through contractors and the Act was construed liberally as social welfare legislation. The Court noted that the statutory exclusions in relation to government establishments did not apply, and that the respondent's trust regulations could not defeat statutory protection where contract workers were denied both trust and statutory benefits. Relying on governmental correspondence indicating provident fund coverage for contractual and casual workers, the Court directed extension of provident fund benefits under the Act to the petitioner's members and similarly situated contract employees. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 12 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297406