ewyosru dh O;k[;k

Hkfo"; fuf/k vf/kfu;e ds vUrxZr et+nwjh dh O;k[;k ij foksk cy fn;k tk jgk gSA ;g vf/kfu;e 1952 ls izHkkoh gS vkSj izk;% izR;sd izfrBkuksa esa Hkfo; fuf/k vaknku ewyosru vkSj egWxkbZ HkRrk ij gh fn;k tk jgk gS vkSj foHkkx }kjk dksbZ vkifRr Hkh ugha mBkbZ tkrh jghA dqN U;k;ky;ksa ds fu.kZ;ksa ls foHkkx Hkh ewyosru dh O;k[;k ij foksk cy nsus yxkA foHkkxh; vf/kdkjh vius fujh{k.kksa esa vkifRr;kWa mBkus yxs gS fd osru <kWapk ds vUrxZr ns; lokjh HkRrk] fk{kk HkRrk] foksk HkRrk vkfn :i esa feyus okys reke HkRrs ^^ewyosru** ls vkorZ ekus tk;sxsa vkSj muij Hkh Hkfo; fuf/k vkanku ns; gksxkA foHkkx dh bl O;k[;k dks mPp U;k;ky;ksa ds fu.kZ; ls vR;f/kd cy feyrk gSA fHkUu&fHkUu mPp U;k;ky;ksa us vius fHkUu&fHkUu er O;Dr fd;s gSA gkbZdksVZ us
D.C.M. ds ekeys esa 1998 esa ;g er O;Dr fd;k gS Held that only those allowance which are of the nature specified in the exclusior clause of sec-2(b) of Act would be considered to have been excluded from its preview. It Further held that the good work allowance used by the employer is not one of Those excluded allowances, Thus the P.F. Contribution would be payable on the payment of this allowance. (L.L.R. 1998 532).

Xkqtjkr gkbZdksVZ us Hkh okZ 2005 esa viuk er blh izdkj O;Dr fd;k gS %&
It ruled that except House Rent allowance, other allowances are included in the definition of basic wages Sec 2(b) of P.F Act (Late. I.C. 422)

blh izdkj e/; iznsk mPp U;k;ky; us Hkh fofHkUu HkRrksa dks ^^ewyosru** ls vkorZekuk gS gkWfyd blds fo:) fjohtu ;kfpdk nk;j gS ftl ij vHkh dksbZ fu.kZ; ugha gqvk gSA blh izdkj fozt ,.M :Q dEiuh ds ekeys esa ih0,Q0 vaknku dk fookn mRiUu gqvk Fkk tks 1962 esa loksZPp U;k;ky; }kjk fuf.kZr fd;k x;kA bl ekeys esa ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; us vf/kfu;e ds vUrxZr ^^ewyosru** vkSj /kkjk 6 ds vUrxZr ns; vkanku dks ,d lkFk O;k[;k dh vkSj ^^ewyosru** esa fdl HkRrs dks kkfey fd;k tk; vkSj fdls u kkfey fd;k tk; blds fy;s fl)kUr izfrikfnr dj fn;kA mlh fl)kUr ij iqu% euhiky ,dsMeh ds ekeys ij vodkk udnhdj.k ij ih0,Q0 ns; gS vFkok ugha bl ij viuk er O;Dr djrs gq, iqu% okZ 2008 esa blh fu.kZ; dks fuEu izdkj of.kZr fd;k %&
In Bridge Roofs case (supra) it was inter alia observed as follows :

The main question therefore that falls for decision is as to which of these two rival contentions is in consonance with Section 2 (b). There is no doubt, that basic wages as defined therein means all emoluments which are earned by an employee while on duty or on leave with wages in accordance with the terms of the contract, of employment and which are paid or payable in cash, if there were no exceptions to this definition, there would have been no difficulty in holding that production bonus whatever be its nature would be included within these terms. The difficulty, however, arises because the definition also provides that certain things will not be included in the term basic wages, and these are contained in three clauses. The first clause mentions the cash value of any food concession while the third clause mentions that presents made by the employer. The fact that the exceptions contain even presents made by the employer shows that though the definition mentions all emoluments which are earned in accordance with the terms of the contract of employment, care was taken to exclude presents which would ordinarily not be earned in accordance with the terms of the contract of employment. Similarly, though the definition includes all emoluments which are paid or payable in cash, the exception excludes the cash value of any food concession, which in any case was not payable in cash. The exceptions therefore do not seem to follow any logical pattern which would be consonance with the main definition. Then we come to Clause (ii). It excludes dearness allowance, house rent allowance, overtime allowance, bonus, commission or any other similar allowance payable to the employee in respect of his employment or of work done in such employment. This exception suggests that even though the main part of the definition includes all emoluments which are earned in accordance with the terms of the contract of employment, certain payments which are in fact the price of labour and earned in accordance with the terms of the contract of employment are excluded from the main part of the definition of basic wages. It is undeniable that the exceptions contained in clause (ii) refer to payments which are earned by an employee in accordance with the terms of his contract of employment. It was admitted by counsel on both sides before us that it was difficult to find any one basis for the exceptions contained in the three clauses. It is clear however from clause (ii) that from the definition of the word basic wages certain earnings were excluded, though they must, be earned by employees in accordance with the terms of the contract of employment. Having excluded dearness allowance from the definition of basic wages, Section 6 then provides for inclusion of dearness allowance for purposes of contribution. But that is clearly the result of the specific provision in section 6 which lays down that contribution shall be 6-1/4 per centum of the basic wages, clearness allowance and retaining allowance (if any). We must therefore try to discover some basis for the exclusion in clause (ii) as also the inclusion of dearness allowance and retaining allowance (if any) in Section 6. It seems that the basis of inclusion in Section 6 and exclusion in clause (ii) is not, whatever is payable in all concerns and is earned by all

permanent employees is included for the purpose, of contribution under section 6, but whatever is not payable by all concerns or may not be earned by all employees of a concern is excluded for the purpose of contribution. Dearness allowance (for examples) is payable in all concerns either as an addition to basic wages or as a part of consolidated wages where a concern does not have separate dearness allowance and basic wages. Similarly, retaining allowance is payable to all permanent employees in all seasonal factories like sugar factories and is therefore included in Section 6 but house rent allowance is not paid in many concerns and sometimes in the same concern it is paid to some employees but not to others, for the theory is that house rent is included in the payment of basic wages plus dearness allowance or consolidated wages. Therefore, house-rent allowance which may not be payable to all employees of a concern and which is certainly not paid by all concern is taken out of the definition of basic wages, even though the basis of payment of house-rent allowance where it is paid is the contract of employment. Similarly, overtime allowance though it is generally in force in all concerns is not earned by all employees of a concern. It is also earned in accordance with the terms of the contract of employment; but because it may not be earned by all employees of a concern it is excluded from basic wages. Similarly, commission or any other similar allowance is excluded from the definition of basic wages for commission and other allowances are not necessarily to be found, in all concern, though where they exist they are earned in accordance with the terms of the contract of employment. It seems therefore that the basis for the exclusion in Clause (ii) of the exceptions in Section 2(b) is that all that is not earned in all concerns or by all employees of concern is excluded from basic wages. To this the exclusion of dearness allowance in clause (ii) is an exception. But that exception has been corrected by including dearness allowance in Section 6 for the purpose of Contribution. Dearness allowance which is an exception in the definition of basic wages is included for the purpose of contribution by Section 6 and the real exceptions therefore in clause (ii) are the other exceptions beside dearness allowance, which, has been included through Section 6.

^^fozt ,.M :Q** ds ekeys esa tks fl)kUr izfrikfnr gS mlh vk/kkj ij vk/kkfjr gksdj fuEu
mPp U;k;ky;ksa us fofHkUu HkRrksa dks ^^ewyosru** ls vkorZ ugh ekuk gS vkSj viuk LiV er fn;k gS fd pwWafd vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 ds vuqlkj budks Hkfo;fuf/k vaknku ns; gsrq kkfey ugha fd;k x;k gS vr% ;s HkRrs viokn dh Js.kh esa vkrs gSa vkSj buij ih0,Q0 vaknku ns; ugha gksxk %&

1) R. Ramanatham Jwellers v/s P.F Commission or (Madras High Court LLR 1998 1145) 2)Vayitri Plantation v/s Baley Mathu (Kerala 1964 LLJ 1132) 3) Amul Kumar Chatk v/s R.P.F.C ( LLJ 1980 II 308 Cal.)

4) Gresham & Co. v/s R.P.F.C (Delhi LLJ II 95) 4)Southesr Alloy Foundics v/s R.P.F.C (Madras LLJ 1982 I Page 28)

mijksDr oS/kkfud foospuk ds vk/kkj ij eS bl O;fDrxr er dk gWaw fd HkRrs tks lsokkrksZ ds vuq:i dk;Z ds cnys ;k fu;kstu ds QyLo:i Hkys gh ns; gq, gksa] vxj mUgs vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 ds vUrxZr vaknku ns; gsrq ewyosru esa kkfey ugha fd;k x;k gS rks mu fofHkUu HkRrksa ij ih0,Q0 vaknku oS/kkfud :i ls ns; ugha gksxkA pqWafd okZ 2008 esa Hkh ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; }kjk ewyosru esa fdu HkRrksa dks kkfey fd;k tkuk pkfg;s bl fookn dks fuf.kZr djrs le; ^^fotz ,.M :Q** ds ekeys esa izfrikfnr fl)kUr dks nksgjk;k gS vr% vkt Hkh mlh fu.kZ; dh oS/kkfudrk gS vkSj ogh izHkkoh ekuk tkuk pkfg;sA e/; iznsk mPp U;k;ky; us lw;kZ jkskuh fy0 ds ekeys esa fnukad 24-03-11 dks tks fu.kZ; fn;k gS mldk egRo vR;f/kd gS D;ksfd ^^fozt ,.M :Q** ds ekeys esa fn;s x;s fu.kZ; dks vk/kkj cukrs gq, e/; iznsk mPp U;k;ky; us viuk fu.kZ; fn;k gS vkSj lokjh HkRrk] foksk HkRrk ,oa vU; HkRrksa ij ih0,Q vaknku ns; crk;k gS izLrqr fu.kZ; dk lkjkak bl izdkj gS %&
In the decision of the Honble Supreme Court, Quoted above, and earlier judgments the Honble Supreme Court has held that on combine reading of Section 2 (b) and Section 6 of the 1952 Act, the wages which is universally, necessarily and ordinarily paid to all across the board, such emoluments are basic wages and where the payment is available to be specially paid to those who avail of the opportunity is not the basic wages. On the basis aforesaid principle of law laid down by the Honble Supreme Court in regard to calculating the basic wages, we have to analyze the factual aspect of the case. In the present case, the petitioner-company has been paying the salary to the workers, which includes, basic wage + VDA + HRA + Transport allowance + Attendance incentive + Special allowance + Washing allowance + Canteen allowance and lunch allowance. It has been deducting the provident fund contribution on two components of Salary i.e. basic wage + VDA. It is an admitted fact that t has been paying transport allowance i.e conveyance allowance all its employees. It is not a case that some employees are not getting the aforesaid allowance. Similarly, in regard to canteen allowance, it has been contended that the aforesaid allowance has been paid, to Operators and those employees, who are required to remain on machines during lunch period. The aforesaid amount has been introduced with the object that at the time of lunch period the production should not be stopped and certain employees volunteered themselves for the aforesaid purpose and they have been paid this amount. It is an optional amount. Hence, in our opinion, in accordance with principle of law laid down by the Honble Supreme Court in Manipal Academy of Higher Education v. Provident Fund Commissioner (2008) 5 SCC 428 the aforesaid amount could not be included in basic wages and there is no liability of the

Petitioner-Company to deduct provident fund of the employees against the aforesaid amount Except this component, in our opinion, the rest of the special allowance paid by the Petitioner- company to the workers are liable to be included under the basic-wages and the petitioner- company is not entitled to deduct the provident fund under the head lunch allowance. Consequently, the petition filed by the Petitioner is partly allowed to the above extent. The impugned order, Annexure P-1 and P-2 passed by both the Authorities are hereby quashed in regard to inclusion of lunch allowance in basic wages for the purpose of payment of provident fund contribution. However, in regard to rest of the components of basic wages, as held by both the Authorities in the impugned orders, are upheld. The Authorities are at liberty to calculate the liability of the Petitioner-company in regards to payment of provident fund contribution in accordance with the provisions of the 1952 Act and the Petitioner-company shall deposit the same accordingly. No order as to costs.

U;k;ky; dh bl O;k[;k ls ;g fudkZ fudyrk gS fd tks ,ykmUl fdlh izfrBku ds lHkh Jfedksa dks ns; gksrk gS vkSj og oSdfYid u gks rks mls ;wuholZy ekuk tk;sxk vkSj ml ij ih0,Q0 vaknku ns; gksxkA ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; us fdlh ,ykmUl dks kkfey djus ds fy, tks fl)kUr izfrikfnr fd;s gS] og fuEu izdkj gS %&
It seems, therefore that the basis for the exclusion in clause (ii) of the exceptions in Sec. 2(b) is that all that is not earned in all concerns or by all employees of concern is excluded from basic wages.

tks HkRrs izk;% lHkh izfrBkuksa }kjk ns; gksrk gks vkSj ,d izfrBku ds lHkh deZpkfj;ksa dks ns; gksrk gks] ogh ,ykmUl ^^csfld cst** esa ekus tk;sxsA x`g fdjk;k HkRrk] lokjh] foksk HkRrk vkfn vU; HkRrs vko;d ugha fd lHkh izfrBkuksa esa ns; gksrs gks Hkys gh fdlh izfrBku esa lHkh deZpkfj;ksa dks ns; gksrs gSA vr% bl izdkj ds HkRrksa dks vaknku gsrq ewyosru esa ugha tksM+k tk ldrkA ekuuh; e/; iznsk mPp U;k;ky; us izfroknh ds izfrBku esa lHkh deZpkfj;ksa dks ns; gksus ds vk/kkj ij gh bl ij vaknku ns; Bgjk;k gSA bl izdkj loksZPp U;k;ky; }kjk funsZfkr nks krksZ esa ls ,d gh krZ iwjh gksus dh fLFkfr esa vaknku gsrq ^^csfld cst** esa fofHkUu HkRrksa dks kkfey djuk esajh jk; esa vkSfpR;iw.kZ ugha gSA

ewyosru ,oa U;wure osru dh lekurk

nwljk egRoiw.kZ fookn ewyosru vkSj U;wure osru dks ysdj mRiUu fd;k x;k gSA vHkh gky esa fnukad 23@05@11 dks Hkfo; fuf/k dk;kZy; ls ,d ljdqyj tkjh fd;k x;k gS ftlesa foHkkxh; vf/kdkfj;ksa dks funsZfkr fd;k x;k gS fd ^^U;wure osru** dks fofHkUu HkRrksa esa foHkDr djds] osru <kWapk cuk;s tkus dks ekU;rk u nsosa vkSj U;wure osru ij ih0,Q0 vaknku fufpr :i ls clwyk tk;A

fofHkUu U;k;ky;ksads fu.kZ;ksa dk gokyk nsdj foHkkx us vius ljdqyj esa mijksDr funsZk tkjh fd;k gS ftls ysdj izfrBkuksa ds le{k dfBu leL;k mRiUu gks xbZ gSA bl ljdqyj ds lUnHkZ esa esjh fof/kd jk; fuEu izdkj gS %& d ;g lgh gS fd ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; us ;g fl)kUr izfrikfnr fd;k gS fd Je vf/kfu;e deZpkfj;ksa dks lqj{kk gsrq cus gS vr% budk foysk.k mnkjrkiwoZd gksuk pkfg;s rkfd vf/kfu;e dh eakkiwjh gks ldsA blh fl)kUr ij ih0,Q0 vf/kfu;e dk Hkh foysk.k gksuk pkfg;s rkfd bldk ykHk deZpkfj;ksa dks lgh :i ls fey ldsA blds lkFk U;k;ky; us ;g Hkh LiV fd;k gS fd dkuwuh O;oLFkk vxj LiV gS rks mlds foysk.k }kjk dkuwu dks iqu% fy[kus dh dksfkk Hkh ugha gksuh pkfg;sA ljdqyj esa ^^ewyosru** vkSj U;wureosru dks leku Lrj ij j[kdj tks oS/kkfud O;k[;k djus dh dksfkk foHkkx }kjk dh xbZ gS og vkSfpR;iw.kZ ugha yxrh] D;ksfd U;wure osru vf/kfu;e 1948 esa cuk vkSj blds vUrxZr ewy osru ugha cfYd ^osru* dks ifjHkkfkr fd;k x;k gS vkSj bl oS/kkfud O;k[;k ds ckn okZ 1952 esa Hkfo; fuf/k vf/kfu;e cuk;k x;k ftlesa vaknku dh /kujkfk dks fu;af=r djus gsrq osru lhek vkSj vaknku gsrq ewyosru ,oa vU; HkRrksa dh O;k[;k dh xbZ gSA nksuksa esa dksbZ lekurk ugha gS vr% ;g dguk fd ewy osru U;wure osru ls de ugha gks ldrk U;k;laxr izrhr ugha gksrkA U;wure osru ds vUrxZr osru dh ifjHkkkk ls fofHkUu HkRrksa dks vyx ugha fd;k x;k gS tcfd ih0,Q0 vf/kfu;e ds vUrxZr ewyosru ls fofHkUu HkRrksa dks vyx j[kk x;k gSA jkT; ljdkj dks vf/kfu;e esa U;wure osru fu/kkZfjr djus dk vf/kdkj gS vr% fHkUu&fHkUu jkT; ljdkj blss fu/kkZfjr djrh gS A vr% leku :i ls ns; gksus dk izu gh ugha mBrk tcfd ih0,Q0 ds ekeys esa loksZPp U;k;ky; us LiV fd;k gS fd leku :i ls ns; HkRrs gh ewyosru esa tksM+s x;s gSA vr% nksuks dks ,d Lrj ij j[kdj oS/kkfud O;k[;k djuk vkSfpR;iw.kZ ugha gksxkA vHkh gky gh esa Qjojh 2011 esa ^^xzqiQksj flD;ksfjVh** ds ekeys esa iatkc ,oa gfj;k.kk mPp U;k;ky; us vius fu.kZ; dh iqfV dh gS fd U;wure osru dks ih0,Q0 vaknku gsrq vk/kkj ugha cuk;k tk ldrkA
Under The E.P.F Act 1952, The definition of basic wage has an appended exclusion clause in which the various allowances have been provided, The Minimum wages Act on the other hand provides for a definition of wage which is distinct from that of the basic wage.

[k 1

2 3

The respondents have rightly excluded certain allowances such as H.R.A washing allowance conveyance allowance while determining Their liability towards the fund.

. mijksDr oS/kkfud O;oLFkk ds vk/kkj ij esajk fudkZ gS %&

1- ftu HkRrksa dks vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 ds vUrxZr Hkfo;fuf/k vaknku gsrq ugha tksM+k x;k gS og fofHkUu enksa ds :i esa ^^ewyosru** dh ifjHkkkk ds viokn Js.kh esa ekus tk;sxsa vkSj mu ij Hkfo; fuf/k vaknku ns; ugha gksxkA 2- ^^U;wure osru** dks Hkfo;fuf/k vaknku gsrq ^^ewyosru** ugha dgk tk ldrkA nksuksa vf/kfu;e dsUnzh; ljdkj }kjk izfrikfnr gS vkSj nksuks esa ^^etnwjh** dks vyx&vyx ifjHkkfkr fd;k x;k gSA 3- ^^U;wure osru** nsus dh oS/kkfud ck/;rk gS vkSj izk;% U;wure osru dks ifjorZuh; egWxkbZ HkRrsa ls tksM+ fn;k x;k gS vr% egWxkbZ HkRrks lfgr etnwjh dks U;wure osru crk;k x;k gSA tks izfrBku U;wure osru gh ns jgs vkSj U;wure osru dks fofHkUu HkRrksa esa foHkDr djds etnwjh dk Hkqxrku dj jgs gS mudh bl dk;Zokgh esa fufpr :i ls Hkfo; fuf/k vaknku dks cpkus dh ^cw* vkrh gS vr% bl i}fr dks izksRlkfgr ugha djuk pkfg;sA e/; iznsk mPp U;k;ky; ds fu.kZ; ds fo:) ;kfpdk vHkh yfEcr gS tc rd bls vfUre :i esa r; ugha fd;k tkrk rc rd izfrBkuksa dks ;FkkfLFkfr esa cus jguk vf/kd dksb Z voS/kkfud ugha gksxkA

,l0vkj0 jk;