Dear Sunil Sardar,
As per Section 2(f), "employee" means any person who is employed for wages in any kind of work, manual or otherwise, in or in connection with the work of an establishment and who gets his wages directly or indirectly from the employer. This definition includes any person:
(i) employed by or through a contractor in or in connection with the work of the establishment;
(ii) engaged as an apprentice, not being an apprentice engaged under the Apprentices Act, 1961 (52 of 1961) or under the standing orders of the establishment.
So, in my opinion (with my limited mental faculty), if an apprentice who is not engaged/registered under the Apprentice Act, 1961, shall not be treated as an apprentice as far as the meaning of "employee" under the PF Act is concerned.
Therefore, if an apprentice is not engaged under the Apprentice Act, they are considered as any other employee, and the company is obligated to deduct PF as per the PF Act. Furthermore, if the company starts deducting PF for those apprentices who are not covered under the Apprentice Act, they will be treated as "workmen" as per the ID Act. The company may face legal issues at the end of the apprentice's training period when terminating the contract, even if the performance is unsatisfactory.
This is why I mentioned the Rs. 6500/- wages ceiling to avoid PF responsibility in the case of apprentices who are not covered under the Apprentice Act.
Jawed Alam