https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307855 The amended paragraph 26(2) of the Employees' Provident Fund Scheme, 1952 was upheld as valid: the challenge based on non-compliance with Section 7(2) of the Act failed, and the amendment was treated as lawfully made. The Court also accepted that the compulsory contribution under the Scheme does not amount to denial of minimum wages, rejected the contention that the amendment is impracticable or unworkable, and held that it is not ultra vires the Act or violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g). The special leave petitions were dismissed, and the High Court's judgment was affirmed. en-us Mon, 17 Apr 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 May 2023 11:11:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307855 The amended paragraph 26(2) of the Employees' Provident Fund Scheme, 1952 was upheld as valid: the challenge based on non-compliance with Section 7(2) of the Act failed, and the amendment was treated as lawfully made. The Court also accepted that the compulsory contribution under the Scheme does not amount to denial of minimum wages, rejected the contention that the amendment is impracticable or unworkable, and held that it is not ultra vires the Act or violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g). The special leave petitions were dismissed, and the High Court's judgment was affirmed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 17 Apr 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307855