thacker.m
2

Dear arka , Pon1965 is absolutely right.....
If any employee getting per month salary more then 6500 then he is exempted from pf deduction but if he wish to deducted pf from his salary then he can do so.So, Clear your doubt for the mention matter.

From India, Mumbai
Kalyan Mitra
6

Dear Ashok,
In any establishment where the number of employees are 20 or more the said establishment comes under the perview of EPF & MP Act 1952 and it is mandatory for the establishment to obtain a code from the local RPFC and remit PF under the said code.
As for salary employees getting a basic salary upto 6500 are covered employees and the employer must remit his PF as per statute provided the total number of employees in the establishment are 20 or more. Employee getting basic salary above 6500 are excluded employees and for them PF is not compulsory.
Since PF is a social security scheme in India almost all the employers pay PF to all employees irrespective of their salary bar.
Kalyan Mitra

From India, Calcutta
pranav.ng
Hello,
Can someone please direct me to the act, section &/or sub section where it is mentioned that epf is voluntary if basic > 6500. I require this to show a copy to my HR dept, as they are not agreeing to my request of not deducting pf.. my basic is above 6500.. please assist...
thanks in advance..

From India, Mumbai
Mishra Sanjay
Please find below an extract of an article by Sh. HL Kumar, Sr. Advocate and Editor, Labour Law Reporter. The entire issue of PF is well illustrated in the link:

COVERAGE OF A NEW EMPLOYEE UNDER

EMPLOYEESí PROVIDENT FUND SCHEME

If the wage/salary of a new employee is above Rs.6500 per month

and he has not been a member of Employees’ Provident Fund or

being member, has settled his account then he is not to be enrolled

as member of the Scheme. However, if the employer and the

employee both agree, there is no bar in enroling such an

employee as member under the Employees’ Provident Funds

Scheme, 1952. Para 34 of the Employees’ Provident Fund Scheme

provides for a declaration by a person before taking up

employment to state in writing whether or not he is a member of

the Fund and, if so, the relevant details thereof are to be given.

As such for every new appointee, an employer must obtain the

declaration in Form-2 prescribed for this purpose. Upon

enrolment it needs to be submitted as prescribed under Para 33

of Employees’ Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provision

Scheme read along with Para 18 of the Employees’ Pension

Scheme. This Form also requires indicating the nominee and

family details. Besides that it is also advisable to get a declaration

in the format as given hereinafter containing declaration by the

newly appointed employee since a coverable employee is to be

enrolled as member of the Provident Fund Scheme from the

very first day of his joining and this provision has also been

upheld by the Bombay High Court.1

COVERAGE OF AN EMPLOYEE WHOSE SALARY

CROSSES RS.6500 PER MONTH

If the wage/salary of an employee working in a covered

establishment and covered under the Act, exceeds Rs.6500 per

month, then he will be entitled to remain covered upto Rs. 6500

per month. For instance, an employee who is a member and

whose salary was Rs.6400 per month, will continue to be a

member to the extent of Rs.6500 per month even when his salary

is increased to Rs.7000 per month. It the employer and employee

both agree, there is no bar in enrolling such or any other employee

as member under the Employees’ Provident Fund Scheme, 1952.

COVERAGE OF A RETIRED EMPLOYEE UNDER

THE SCHEME

There are two types of retired employees so far as Employees’

Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 is

concerned :

1. Those who retire from the establishments including public

sector undertakings which are covered under the

Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions

Act, 1952 and they were also members of the Fund and;

2. Those who retire after working in an establishment which

was not covered under the aforesaid Act and the Scheme

including in the Government service where Employees’

Provident Funds Act did not apply.

In the former case, the retired employee from a covered

establishment and having settled his Provident Funds account

from the Provident Fund Department or the Provident Fund Trust

(even on attaining of 55 years age) will not be legally eligible or

liable for Provident Fund membership on his employment or

re-employment in a covered establishment albeit when his wage/

salary is less then Rs.6500 per month. If either of the two

conditions are not fulfilled, the employee will be eligible and

liable to be covered from the first day of joining at least on

Rs.6500 per month even when he is drawing more salary.

The term “excluded employees” is a product of the Employees’

Provident Fund Scheme, 1952 as defined in clause (f) of para 2 as

under :

“An employee whose pay at the time he is otherwise entitled

to become a member of the Fund, exceeds six thousand and

five hundred rupees per month.

Explanation : ‘Pay’ includes basic wages with dearness

allowance, retaining allowance (if any) and cash value of food

concessions admissible thereon.”

“An excluded employee employed in or in connection with

the work of a factory or other establishment to which this Scheme

applies shall, on ceasing to be such an employee, be entitled

and required to become a member of the fund from the date he

ceased to be such employee.” [para 26(3) of EPF Scheme]

Persons who are retiring and settling their claim with the

Provident Funds authorities after attaining the age of 55 years

will be ‘excluded employees’. In this context, the word ‘Fund’ is

important. It signifies that only those persons who have settled

their claim with the Provident Fund established by the Employees’

Provident Fund Act/Scheme or any other Fund covered under

1. Kay Iron Works v. Union of India, 2007 LLR 175 (Bom. HC)

Coverage of Employees under Provident Fund Act

Articles Articles

that Act/Scheme will qualify for being termed as ‘excluded

employee’. To be more specific it is pertinent to note that anybody

retiring from an establishment of the Government or an

establishment not covered by the Employees’ Provident Funds

and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 will not qualify for

exclusion from membership in a covered establishment under

any circumstances whatsoever.

In this regard reference could be made to a judgment of the

Bombay High Court, where the Asstt. Provident Fund

Commissioner for Maharashtra and Goa called upon the

petitioner to remit the provident fund dues in respect of 11

employees who had already retired. Such employees were, in

fact, retired from service on attaining the age of 55 years. The

amounts due towards their provident fund were also received

by them. However, after retirement, these persons were allowed

to work as per their convenience subject to their health conditions.

The petitioner Company challenged the demand raised by the

provident fund authorities in a writ petition and referred to para

2(f) of the Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme defining ‘excluded

employee’ read with clause (a) of paragraph 69 of the Employees’

Provident Funds Scheme (supra). The High Court quashed the

demand as raised by the Provident Fund authorities.2

RETIRED EMPLOYEE IF COVERED ARE NOT

ELIGIBLE FOR EMPLOYEESí PENSION

SCHEME

In view of provisions contained in para 6A of the Employees’

Pension Scheme, 1995 restricting membership of the Pension

Scheme till attaining the age of 58 years or the fact that any

pensioner availing pensionery benefit under the Employees’

Pension Scheme, 1995, will not be required to be enrolled to the

membership of the pension fund (EPS, 1995) (though they will be

enrolled to the membership of the Employees’ Provident Fund

Scheme, 1952 as there is no age bar for the same) there will be no

requirement to divert their share of pension contribution to the

pension fund. Resultantly their entire EPF contribution will

remain credited in their provident fund account only.

From India, New Delhi
yoghitha
1

wt are the penalty for having more than 20 ees bt not registerd under pf act
From India, Chennai
naazpc@gmail.com
Dear Concern
Kindly let me on the below concerns with respect to the PF
1) HAVING A TOTAL OF 20 EMPLOYEES AND ALL HAVE A SALARY MORE THAN 6500, IS IT MANDATORY TO GO FOR PF
2) WHAT IS THE MAXIMUM TEAM SIZE WHICH CAN BE EXCLUDED FROM BEING IN PF BRACKET
3) READ IN A SITE THAT IF ALL THE EMPLOYEES AND EMPLOYERS AGREE NOT TO GO FOR PF, IT CAN BE EXEMPTED
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO KNOW ABOUT THE ESI
WITH THE POINTS BEING SAME AS FOR THE PF

From India, Kochi
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.






Contact Us Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service

All rights reserved @ 2024 CiteHR ®

All Copyright And Trademarks in Posts Held By Respective Owners.