Case Study: Salary Above ₹15,000 – Contributions Capped Under EPF Law

Case:

Sunquest Information Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, West Bengal & Anr.
WPA 20947/2021

Court and Date:

Calcutta High Court
Hon’ble Justice Ms. Shampa Dutt (Paul)
Date: 10 February 2025

Relevant Law:

• Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952
• Employees’ Provident Fund Scheme, 1952 – Paragraphs 2(f), 26, 26A & 26B

These provisions define membership, continuation, and contribution limits under the EPF Scheme, especially concerning employees earning above the wage ceiling.

Background:

The petitioner, Sunquest Information Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd., challenged an order passed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (RPFC), which directed the company to extend EPF benefits to five employees.

The company contended that these employees — Anirban Roy, Puspendu Mukherjee, Sanjeev Kumar, Prasun Das, and Vitesh Balaji — were “excluded employees” since their monthly salaries exceeded ₹15,000, the prescribed ceiling under the EPF Act.

Additionally, it was claimed that the said employees had already withdrawn their provident fund accumulations from their previous employment and thus were not eligible for further coverage. Despite these claims, the RPFC held that they continued to be eligible EPF members and directed the employer to deposit the due contributions.

Legal Issue:

Whether employees drawing monthly pay exceeding ₹15,000 at the time of joining a new establishment are required to be included under the EPF Scheme, and whether their employer must continue to make contributions under the Act.

Key Legal Findings:

1. Retention of Membership (Para 26A):
   A member of the Fund continues to be a member until they withdraw their accumulated balance under Paragraph 69.
   ➤ Even if the monthly salary exceeds ₹15,000, both employer and employee contributions are limited to ₹15,000 as the wage ceiling.
2. Resolution of Doubt (Para 26B):
   When there is ambiguity regarding an employee’s entitlement or requirement to continue as a member, the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner is empowered to decide after hearing both parties.
3. Employees’ Status:
   The five employees were already EPF members in their previous organizations and had not withdrawn their full accumulations before joining Sunquest Information Systems. Therefore, their membership continued automatically.
4. Legal Interpretation of “Basic Wages”:
   Referencing landmark judgments including:
   • Regional Provident Fund Commissioner v. Vivekananda Vidyamandir (AIR 2019 SC 1240)
   • Manipal Academy of Higher Education v. PF Commissioner (2008) 5 SCC 428
   • Bridge & Roof Co. (India) Ltd. v. Union of India (1963 AIR SC 1474)
     The Court reaffirmed that basic wages include all uniform payments, while variable payments like overtime, bonuses, or commissions are excluded.
5. PF Limit Applicability:
   The Court clarified that even if the salary exceeds ₹15,000, the contribution (both employer’s and employee’s share) must be restricted to ₹15,000 per month as per the statutory ceiling.

Judgment:

Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul) upheld the RPFC’s order, ruling that:

• The employees in question were rightly covered under the EPF Scheme.
• Their continued membership was valid, and contributions were rightly directed by the RPFC.
• The order under Para 26B was issued after due consideration and hearing, and hence, not perverse or illegal.

The writ petition was dismissed, affirming that the employees were entitled to the benefits provided under the proviso to Paragraph 26A of the EPF Scheme.

Conclusion:

The Calcutta High Court reaffirmed that EPF membership and contribution obligations are not negated by higher salaries.
If an employee was already an EPF member and has not withdrawn their previous accumulations, their membership continues even if their new salary exceeds ₹15,000.

Employers must therefore deposit contributions up to the ceiling limit, ensuring compliance with the EPF Scheme’s welfare intent.

Key Learning:

• Continuity of Membership: Employees remain EPF members until they withdraw their full accumulations.
• Wage Ceiling: Contributions are capped at ₹15,000, not exempted for higher earners.
• Legal Clarity: Para 26A and 26B of the EPF Scheme clearly govern membership and contribution obligations.
• Employer Duty: Establishments must verify prior membership before excluding employees from EPF coverage.
• Judicial Principle: The EPF Act is a social welfare legislation, interpreted liberally to extend employee protection.

Download the PDF copy of this Case:

Join the community that’s changing the way businesses handle compliance in India.