11
Dear Mahesh,
The Telangana Govt. has published various notifications in respect of different types of industries and categories. These notifications can be downloaded from this links.
https://labour.telangana.gov.in/minimumWages.do
For the purposes of understanding these notifications this govt. also published separate 'guidance notes' & List of classifications which should be studied before applying the MW on scheduled employments. These pages are attached for your use.
Andhra Pradesh MW is posted separately.
From India, Bangalore
The Telangana Govt. has published various notifications in respect of different types of industries and categories. These notifications can be downloaded from this links.
https://labour.telangana.gov.in/minimumWages.do
For the purposes of understanding these notifications this govt. also published separate 'guidance notes' & List of classifications which should be studied before applying the MW on scheduled employments. These pages are attached for your use.
Andhra Pradesh MW is posted separately.
From India, Bangalore
Similar to Telangana state, AP Govt. also published these information in this link:
Government of AP | Labour Department
Appropriate Notes & classifications are attached.
From India, Bangalore
Government of AP | Labour Department
Appropriate Notes & classifications are attached.
From India, Bangalore
Dear Sir(s)
Recently, Supreme Court of India allowed the plea of EPFO to treat all kind of allowances as "Gross Wages"for commuting PF contributions barring HRA/OT etc. Is there any cut off date for implementation of the verdict of SC?
From India, Hyderabad
Recently, Supreme Court of India allowed the plea of EPFO to treat all kind of allowances as "Gross Wages"for commuting PF contributions barring HRA/OT etc. Is there any cut off date for implementation of the verdict of SC?
From India, Hyderabad
Hi Hr.Mgr,
Pl.read the discussions on the subject in this link - https://www.citehr.com/609367-brief-...ml#post2420965
You'll know the SC judgment is on an appeal filed by employers against the action of RPFC interpreting the definition of whether 'special allowance' forms part of 'wages' for the purposes computation of contribution to EPF a/cs of employees. The SC have upheld the contention of RPFC and thus those allowances should be reckoned as 'wages'. Since the RPFC's contention pertaining to the prior periods covering the past liability constituting 'an arrears' of contribution resulting in rework the past liability. The exact date of commencement of such a past period has not been disclosed in the SC judgment specifically. But it's very clear this judgment will be applicable for the period inrespect of which the RPFC raised the non-compliance involving the respective employers. A plain reading of the subject matter would reveal 'retrospective effect' which is from the 'beginning' due to interpretation of 'wages' the definition of the Act itself as upheld by the SC judgment. As a consequence all the jurisdictional RPFCs are likely to ask all the employers under their respective jurisdiction to rework and remit the difference. Therefore we have to keep our fingers crossed so far as the 'cut off' date is concerned in the context.
From India, Bangalore
Pl.read the discussions on the subject in this link - https://www.citehr.com/609367-brief-...ml#post2420965
You'll know the SC judgment is on an appeal filed by employers against the action of RPFC interpreting the definition of whether 'special allowance' forms part of 'wages' for the purposes computation of contribution to EPF a/cs of employees. The SC have upheld the contention of RPFC and thus those allowances should be reckoned as 'wages'. Since the RPFC's contention pertaining to the prior periods covering the past liability constituting 'an arrears' of contribution resulting in rework the past liability. The exact date of commencement of such a past period has not been disclosed in the SC judgment specifically. But it's very clear this judgment will be applicable for the period inrespect of which the RPFC raised the non-compliance involving the respective employers. A plain reading of the subject matter would reveal 'retrospective effect' which is from the 'beginning' due to interpretation of 'wages' the definition of the Act itself as upheld by the SC judgment. As a consequence all the jurisdictional RPFCs are likely to ask all the employers under their respective jurisdiction to rework and remit the difference. Therefore we have to keep our fingers crossed so far as the 'cut off' date is concerned in the context.
From India, Bangalore
Find answers from people who have previously dealt with business and work issues similar to yours - Please Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query.
Telangana Minimum Wages CPI Notification 1st April 2019.pdf