https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307881 Amended paragraph 26(2) of the Employees' Provident Fund Scheme, 1952 extended Fund membership to every employee employed in or in connection with a covered establishment, and the statutory definition of "employee" in section 2(f) was read broadly to include persons working for wages in any kind of work, manual or otherwise. On that construction, temporary, casual and site workers engaged in connection with the establishment fell within the Scheme's scope. The validity of the amendment had already been upheld at the Supreme Court level, while objections under section 7-A remained available. The writ appeal was rejected and the writ petition dismissal affirmed. en-us Thu, 31 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 14 May 2023 12:55:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307881 Amended paragraph 26(2) of the Employees' Provident Fund Scheme, 1952 extended Fund membership to every employee employed in or in connection with a covered establishment, and the statutory definition of "employee" in section 2(f) was read broadly to include persons working for wages in any kind of work, manual or otherwise. On that construction, temporary, casual and site workers engaged in connection with the establishment fell within the Scheme's scope. The validity of the amendment had already been upheld at the Supreme Court level, while objections under section 7-A remained available. The writ appeal was rejected and the writ petition dismissal affirmed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 31 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307881