I would like to illustrate the definition of Sec 2(ff) and 2(fff) of EPF & MP Act, 1952.
"Exempted employee means an employee to whom a scheme or the insurance scheme, as the case may be, would, but for the exemption granted under sec 17, have applied."
"Exempted establishment means an establishment in respect of which an exemption has been granted under sec.17 from the operation of all or any of the provisions of any scheme or the insurance scheme, as the case may be, whether such exemption has been granted to the establishment as such or to any person or class of persons employed therein."
While deciding about exemption under Sec.17 of EPF Act, PF authorities definitely test the application to determine whether the proposal offered is better than the Scheme.
The Supreme Court in Cemindia Co. Ltd Vs Bachubhai N. Raval (1998 (1) LLJ Page No.138) held: Any establishment that carries on an activity which is part of the building and construction industry should naturally be exempted from the operation of the act because the expression "building and construction industry" collectively refers to all activities connected with the industry.
In your case, in my opinion:
• If your company is already covered under the EPF Act, you cannot escape from the legal obligations (EPF Act). Migratory labor will also be covered under the EPF Act.
• If you seek exemption for a specific class of employees by demonstrating wages above the prescribed limit (>6500), it will be permissible under the law, provided they were not covered by PF in their previous employment.
• Under the protection of the "Building and Construction Industry," you can apply for exemption.
Contrary to the above, please let me know.
Regards,
D. Pannerselvam