Court says interim order on Rs 14.32 crore PF dues not appealable; foreign staff deemed liable under EPF Act
A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court comprising acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Renuka Yara dismissed a writ appeal of M/s. Tata Lockheed Martin Aerostructures Ltd. (TLMAL) challenging an interim order qua ₹14.32 crore Provident Fund (PF) liability for 14 foreign nationals.
The panel reiterated that appeals against interlocutory orders (interim rulings) were not appealable unless they qualified as a "judgment" under the Letters Patent. Earlier, The Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) accused TLMAL of failing to remit PF contributions for 14 foreign workers employed between 2012 and 2017, treating them as "international workers" under the EPF Act, 1952. TLMAL contested this, arguing that these individuals were "loaned employees" from Lockheed Martin TAS International Corporation (USA) and not direct hires, thus exempt from PF obligations.
The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (RPFC) in 2018 assessed the liability of ₹14.32 crore towards discharge of Provident Fund and Penalty, which TLMAL challenged before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal. The tribunal initially stayed the demand on the condition that the company deposit 30 per cent (₹4.29 crore) of the amount, which TLMAL complied. In March 2025, the tribunal dismissed TLMAL’s appeal, prompting the company to approach the High Court. Initially, a single judge granted TLMAL interim relief, staying further proceedings on the condition that the company deposit an additional 20 per cent (₹2.86 crore) within three weeks.
However, senior counsel clarified that the company had not authorised such a submission. The court recalled its earlier order, observing that the submission made by counsel was without instructions. TLMAL subsequently filed a writ appeal arguing that the order of the single judge in recalling the stay of further proceedings caused "serious prejudice". The panel speaking through acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul held that only orders finally deciding an issue can be appealed.
