Ramu has been employed in a factory as a part-time sweeper to clean the floors twice during the day. The Provident Fund Inspector visited the factory premises and raised objection for non-inclusion of his name in the mus
CS Executive · Industrial, Labour & General Laws · PYQS · December 2013
Ramu has been employed in a factory as a part-time sweeper to clean the floors twice during the day. The Provident Fund Inspector visited the factory premises and raised objection for non-inclusion of his name in the muster roll and not paying provident fund contributions. Is Ramu an 'employee' under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952? Is the objection raised by the Provident Fund Inspector valid?
Topics: Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952
Related Questions in this Topic
- Section 17 [A(1)] of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 provides :
- Priority of payment of contributions over other debts prescribed in Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisio...
- Who is empowered to frame the scheme/s under Employees' Provident Funds and Misc. Provisions Act, 1952?
- Which one of the following is correct about the application of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Act, 1952...
- Under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, how much contributory service is required o...