Reports Forming The Basis For Determining EPF Dues Must Be Shared With Parties: Kerala High Court

Kerala High Court: A single bench of Justice N. Nagresh overturned the orders of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court (CGIT) in two writ petitions filed by Sree Narayana Guru Memorial Educational & Cultural Trust. These orders demanded the Trust pay alleged EPF dues. The court ruled that repeated factual errors, procedural issues, and the lack of a fair hearing made the orders invalid. Authorities were directed to issue new orders within four months. Background The petitioner, Sree Narayana Guru Memorial Educational and Cultural Trust, runs multiple establishments, including an engineering college. While most units shared one PF code, the college had a separate one. After an Enforcement Officer's visit, discrepancies in EPF contributions and employee enrollments were identified. This led the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner to calculate dues of ₹19,89,672 and ₹24,49,123 for different periods. The Trust contested these before the CGIT, alleging errors like missing records, duplicate entries, and wrongly including employees earning above the threshold salary. Arguments The petitioner claimed the EPFO used incorrect employee records, resulting in inflated dues. They said the Enforcement Officer's report from May 28, 2015, was neither shared nor verified with them. They pointed out errors such as duplicate entries and the inclusion of employees already enrolled under the PF scheme. They also argued remittances made during the period weren't considered, and that the CGIT orders were communicated late, denying them a chance to properly challenge the findings. The respondents rebutted by submitting that their assessments were based on detailed record checks. They argued that several eligible employees were not enrolled, noting only 27 out of 340 eligible employees were covered. Further, they claimed that all procedural norms were followed and that the petitioner failed to provide required records, forcing them to rely on existing materials. Thus, they asserted that the orders were legally sound. Court's Reasoning The court noted several procedural lapses and set aside the orders. First, it found the Enforcement Officer's report, the key basis for the disputed dues, was not shared with the petitioner. Second, the court noted errors in the employee list, such as duplications and inclusion of individuals who were already covered or earning above the EPF salary limit. It noted that nine duplicate names were identified in the records. Third, the court observed that remittances of ₹3,43,692 made during the disputed period weren't factored into the EPF dues. Thus, the court directed the respondents to revisit the matter, while giving the petitioner a fair opportunity to present their case. Decided on: 02-12-2024 Case Name: Sree Narayana Guru Memorial Educational & Cultural Trust v. The Assistant Provident Fund CommissionerCitation: 2024 Live Law (Ker) 799 Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. P. Ramakrishnan, Ms. Preethi Ramakrishnan, Mr. C. Anil Kumar, Ms. Asha K. Shenoy, Mr. Pratap Abraham Varghese, and Mr. Gokul Krishna. Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. R. Prem Sankar and Mr. Sajeev Kumar K. Gopal Click Here To Read/Download The Order

Reports Forming The Basis For Determining EPF Dues Must Be Shared With Parties: Kerala High Court

Pranav Kumar

Tags