TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (5) TMI 511
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Employees Provident Funds and (Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for brevity) was made applicable to banks carrying on its business in any State or territory and having no operation or branch outside that State. By a notification dated 9.3.2000, the provisions of the Act have been made applicable to all non-nationalised banks in India. In view of this, petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 are now required to cover their eligible employees under the provisions of the Act. And by this, there would be three categories of employees in the petitioner banks, namely: a) Employees whose basic wage and dearness allowance put together is Rs. 5,000/- or less. These employees would have to be covered under the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s and those of the Private Sector banks. There is thus no basis for differentiating between the nationalised and non-nationalised banks in the matter of coverage under the Provident Fund Act and the Scheme. He would submit that petitioners Nos. 3 to 6, for instance, would be subject to discrimination in the matter of terminal benefits, by virtue of the impugned notification. While employees drawing more than Rs. 5,000/- per month enjoy the benefit of provident fund contributions on their basic salary as also enjoy a far superior pension Scheme under which pension amount is related to the cost of living index, the covered in so far as they are concerned, is limited to Rs. 5,000/- and even if their salary crosses Rs. 5,000/- in future and the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t sought to be achieved by the statute in question. 6. Per contra, Shri. Ashok Haranahalli, appearing for the respondent contends that under the impugned notification the provisions of the Employees Provident Fund Scheme are made applicable to Banks other than Nationalised Banks. The Act was passed in the year 1952 to provide the institution of Provident Fund Scheme for employees to different kinds of establishments and all industries covered under Schedule I of the Act. The object of the Act and the three Schemes thereunder is to ensure the security of the workers at the time of retirement. In case the establishments are giving better benefits under the Act, they can always seek exemption under Section 17 of the Act. 7. He would s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ligible return. Basant Kumar Sarkar and Ors. v. The Eagle Rolling Mills Ltd. and Ors. The question was whether Section 1(3) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 was invalid on the footing that it contravened Article 14 of the Constitution. Since under the sub-section the Central Government was conferred power to apply the provisions of the Act by Notification and was afforded absolute discretion in this regard and was not guided by any legislative provision and therefore was invalid. Negativing the argument the Supreme Court held that the sub-section was not an illustration of delegated legislation, it is, what can be properly called, conditional legislation. The course adopted by modern legislatures in dealing with Welfare sc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n Scheme. By virtue of the impugned notifications, the petitioners are liable to extend yet another pension Scheme to the already existing Pension Scheme. And this casts a serious financial burden on the petitioners. 11. The amounts deducted towards Provident Fund or Pension Scheme are fully secured. The funds are being invested as per the pattern of investments notified by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, from time to time. 12. On these rival contentions, it is to be noted that the impugned notifications are issued in exercise of power of, what may be properly termed, as conditional legislation. There is no authority brought to my attention for the proposition that conditional legislation is immune from challenge. 13.....