Ranchi |
The has taken a strong stand against negligence in the effective implementation of the Employees’ Provident Fund (EPF) law and expressed serious displeasure with the state government and the Industries Department. A division bench comprising Chief Justice and Justice directed that all industrial units operating in the state must mandatorily register with the Industries Department by June 30, 2026.
The court clarified that the order will apply to all existing industrial units, while new units must complete registration at the time of their establishment. The Industries Department has been instructed to immediately circulate this order to all concerned departments and industrial units. The next hearing in the matter has been scheduled for January 30.
The directions were issued while hearing a public interest litigation filed by Pankaj Kumar. Appearing for the petitioner, advocate Aparajita Bhardwaj informed the court that Home Guards have not yet been provided EPF benefits, despite it being a statutory requirement.
Questions Raised Over Delay in EPF Benefits
During the hearing, the High Court questioned the seriousness of the state government in extending EPF benefits to employees. The court noted that a proposal to include contractual workers, daily wage earners, and casual employees under the EPF framework had been sent to the Finance Department, but no concrete action had been taken even after four months. The court termed this delay as a major lapse on the part of the government.
Court Shocked by Registration Figures
It was also revealed during the proceedings that only 1,324 industrial units across Jharkhand are registered with the Industries Department, and merely 231 of them fall under the EPF Act. Expressing concern, the court observed that due to inadequate registration, proper enforcement of the EPF law is not possible.
The Industries Department informed the court that earlier registration of industrial units was not mandatory, but it has now been made compulsory. During the hearing, Industries Department Director appeared in person. After considering his explanation, the court dropped the ongoing contempt proceedings against him and granted exemption from personal appearance.
0 Comments