Dear Mahesh,
The Telangana Government has published various notifications regarding different types of industries and categories. These notifications can be downloaded from the following link: https://labour.telangana.gov.in/minimumWages.do.
For a better understanding of these notifications, the government has also released separate 'guidance notes' and a list of classifications that should be reviewed before applying the minimum wage to scheduled employments. These documents are attached for your reference. Additionally, the Minimum Wage information for Andhra Pradesh is provided separately.
Thank you.
From India, Bangalore
The Telangana Government has published various notifications regarding different types of industries and categories. These notifications can be downloaded from the following link: https://labour.telangana.gov.in/minimumWages.do.
For a better understanding of these notifications, the government has also released separate 'guidance notes' and a list of classifications that should be reviewed before applying the minimum wage to scheduled employments. These documents are attached for your reference. Additionally, the Minimum Wage information for Andhra Pradesh is provided separately.
Thank you.
From India, Bangalore
Similar to Telangana state, the AP Govt. also published this information on the following link: [Government of AP | Labour Department](http://labour.ap.gov.in/elibrary_mw.php#). Appropriate notes and classifications are attached.
From India, Bangalore
From India, Bangalore
Dear Sir(s),
Recently, the Supreme Court of India allowed the plea of EPFO to treat all kinds of allowances as "Gross Wages" for computing PF contributions, excluding HRA/OT, etc. Is there any cut-off date for the implementation of the SC verdict?
From India, Hyderabad
Recently, the Supreme Court of India allowed the plea of EPFO to treat all kinds of allowances as "Gross Wages" for computing PF contributions, excluding HRA/OT, etc. Is there any cut-off date for the implementation of the SC verdict?
From India, Hyderabad
Hi, HR Manager,
Please read the discussions on the subject in this link - https://www.citehr.com/609367-brief-...ml#post2420965. You'll know the Supreme Court judgment is on an appeal filed by employers against the action of RPFC interpreting the definition of whether 'special allowance' forms part of 'wages' for the purpose of computation of contribution to EPF accounts of employees.
The Supreme Court has upheld the contention of RPFC, and thus, those allowances should be reckoned as 'wages'. Since RPFC's contention pertains to the prior periods covering the past liability constituting 'an arrear' of contribution resulting in reworking the past liability. The exact date of the commencement of such a past period has not been disclosed in the Supreme Court judgment specifically. But it's very clear this judgment will be applicable for the period in respect of which the RPFC raised the non-compliance involving the respective employers.
A plain reading of the subject matter would reveal a 'retrospective effect' which is from the 'beginning' due to the interpretation of 'wages,' the definition of the Act itself as upheld by the Supreme Court judgment. As a consequence, all the jurisdictional RPFCs are likely to ask all the employers under their respective jurisdiction to rework and remit the difference. Therefore, we have to keep our fingers crossed so far as the 'cut off' date is concerned in the context.
From India, Bangalore
Please read the discussions on the subject in this link - https://www.citehr.com/609367-brief-...ml#post2420965. You'll know the Supreme Court judgment is on an appeal filed by employers against the action of RPFC interpreting the definition of whether 'special allowance' forms part of 'wages' for the purpose of computation of contribution to EPF accounts of employees.
The Supreme Court has upheld the contention of RPFC, and thus, those allowances should be reckoned as 'wages'. Since RPFC's contention pertains to the prior periods covering the past liability constituting 'an arrear' of contribution resulting in reworking the past liability. The exact date of the commencement of such a past period has not been disclosed in the Supreme Court judgment specifically. But it's very clear this judgment will be applicable for the period in respect of which the RPFC raised the non-compliance involving the respective employers.
A plain reading of the subject matter would reveal a 'retrospective effect' which is from the 'beginning' due to the interpretation of 'wages,' the definition of the Act itself as upheld by the Supreme Court judgment. As a consequence, all the jurisdictional RPFCs are likely to ask all the employers under their respective jurisdiction to rework and remit the difference. Therefore, we have to keep our fingers crossed so far as the 'cut off' date is concerned in the context.
From India, Bangalore
Engage with peers to discuss and resolve work and business challenges collaboratively. Our AI-powered platform, features real-time fact-checking, peer reviews, and an extensive historical knowledge base. - Register and Log In.