K.Baiju vs State Of Kerala

Sathish Ninan, J

The petitioner is the holder of an FL-3 licence. According to the petitioner, the establishment is covered under the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act (EPF Act) and Scheme made thereunder and therefore, they are not liable to pay contributions under the Kerala Abkari Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1989. Though the petitioner submitted Ext.P2 request before respondents 2 and 3 for issuance of clearance certificate, they are insisting for payment of Welfare Fund, is the grievance.

Heard the learned counsel on either sides. Also perused the statement filed on behalf of the 6th respondent.

If the establishment is covered under the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act and the Payment of Gratuity Act, the petitioner is not liable to pay Welfare Fund under the Kerala Abkari Workers Welfare Fund Scheme, has been held by this Court in Exts.P3 and P4 judgments. The sixth respondent Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner has filed a statement to the effect that the petitioner is an assessee under the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act. Therefore, the petitioner is not liable to pay contributions under the Abkari Workers Welfare Fund Act. The list of employees covered under the EPF Act is furnished by the second respondent along with the statement filed before this Court. It shall be open for respondents 2 and 3 to verify the same and ensure that all the workers of the petitioner are covered under the EPF Act and if they are covered, Clearance Certificate as sought for under Ext.P2 shall be issued. If any of the employees are not so covered, it will be open for respondents 2 and 3 to demand contributions in respect of those employees. Let the needful be done within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.