Economic and Social Development

51. The Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act does *

The Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act does *not* apply to

[amp_mcq option1=”any establishment registered under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1912 employing less than 50 persons and working without the aid of power.” option2=”any establishment which is a factory engaged in any industry as specified under the Act in which minimum of 20 persons are employed.” option3=”any other establishment employing minimum of 20 persons as specified by the Central Government.” option4=”all such establishments employing less than 20 persons, as specified by a notification in the Official Gazette by the Central Government after a minimum of 2 months prior notice.” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct answer is A.
Section 16 of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, lists the establishments to which the Act does not apply. Section 16(a) specifically excludes “to any establishment registered under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, or under any other law for the time being in force and employing less than fifty persons and working without the aid of power.” Option A perfectly matches this description.
Options B and C describe establishments that are covered by the mandatory provisions of the Act (Section 1(3)(a) and (b) respectively), not excluded from them. Option D describes a scenario related to potential mandatory coverage for establishments below 20 employees upon government notification (though typically voluntary coverage applies below 20), not a category of exclusion under Section 16.

52. Under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act,

Under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, the Central Government may authorize an employee to maintain a Provident Fund Account in relation to the establishment, upon an application made by the employer and majority of such establishment’s employees provided that the number of persons employed in that establishment is not less than

[amp_mcq option1=”20″ option2=”50″ option3=”100″ option4=”200″ correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct answer is A.
The question refers to the Central Government authorizing an establishment to maintain its own Provident Fund Account upon application by the employer and majority of employees. This scenario typically applies to establishments that are mandatorily covered under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (EPF Act) and seek exemption from the Government Scheme to maintain their own provident fund trust (under Section 17(1A)). The EPF Act mandatorily applies to establishments employing 20 or more persons (Section 1(3)). An establishment must be covered by the Act to apply for such an exemption. Therefore, the number of persons employed in that establishment must be “not less than” the threshold for mandatory coverage, which is 20.
Section 1(3)(a) states the Act applies to factories engaged in scheduled industries employing 20 or more persons. Section 1(3)(b) states the Act applies to any other establishment employing 20 or more persons notified by the Central Government. Section 1(5) (formerly 1(4)) allows voluntary coverage for establishments with less than 20 employees, but the question’s condition “not less than” points towards the mandatory coverage threshold. Section 17 deals with exemptions, where the Central Government can authorize an establishment to maintain its own PF if it provides benefits not less favourable than the statutory scheme. This exemption is available to establishments to which the Act applies, i.e., generally those with 20 or more employees.

53. Which one of the following is a condition precedent for appointment as

Which one of the following is a condition precedent for appointment as the presiding officer of a labour court under Section 7 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947?

[amp_mcq option1=”Holding judicial office in India for a minimum of 15 years” option2=”Having minimum experience of 5 years as a District Judge or Additional District Judge” option3=”Minimum 20 years of experience as presiding officer of a labour court constituted under any State Act” option4=”Minimum 3 years of experience as an officer of the Indian Judicial Service in Grade III” correct=”option2″]

This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct answer is B.
Section 7(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, specifies the qualifications for appointment as the presiding officer of a Labour Court. One of the conditions listed in Section 7(3)(b) is that the person “has, for a period of not less than three years, been a District Judge or an Additional District Judge”. Option B states “Having minimum experience of 5 years as a District Judge or Additional District Judge”. Since 5 years is “not less than three years”, this condition is fulfilled by a person with 5 years of experience as a District Judge or Additional District Judge.
Other qualifications under Section 7(3) include being a High Court Judge (a), holding any judicial office in India for not less than seven years (c), or being the presiding officer of a State Labour Court for not less than five years (d). Options A and C list judicial office and State Labour Court PO experience, respectively, but with incorrect minimum durations (15 years vs 7 years for judicial office; 20 years vs 5 years for State Labour Court PO). Option D, minimum 3 years of experience as an officer of the Indian Judicial Service in Grade III, is a specific rank which usually falls under the general category of “judicial office” requiring 7 years experience under Section 7(3)(c); 3 years in IJS Grade III typically does not meet the 7-year threshold for judicial office, nor is it usually equivalent to District Judge experience. While technically options A and C also state durations exceeding the minimum requirements of the Act, implying they are also valid conditions, the question asks for “which one of the following is a condition precedent”. Option B presents a specific category (DJ/Addl DJ) with a duration (5 years) that clearly meets the minimum requirement (3 years) for that category as listed in the Act. Assuming the question is well-posed and intends a single correct answer, Option B is the most direct representation of a valid condition derived from the Act’s specified categories, despite the duration being higher than the minimum.

54. According to the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which one of the follo

According to the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which one of the following is a condition precedent to retrenchment of a workman employed in any industry for not less than one year ?

[amp_mcq option1=”Three months’ notice in writing” option2=”One month’s notice in writing” option3=”Wages equivalent to minimum three months’ average pay for every year of completed service to be paid” option4=”Wages equivalent to minimum one month’s average pay for every year of completed service to be paid” correct=”option2″]

This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct answer is B.
Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, lays down the conditions precedent to retrenchment of a workman who has been in continuous service for not less than one year. These conditions are:
(a) the workman has been given one month’s notice in writing indicating the reasons for retrenchment and the period of notice has expired, or the workman has been paid, in lieu of such notice, wages for the period of the notice;
(b) the workman has been paid, at the time of retrenchment, compensation which shall be equivalent to fifteen days’ average pay for every completed year of continuous service or any part thereof in excess of six months; and
(c) notice in the prescribed manner has been served on the appropriate Government or such authority as may be specified by the appropriate Government by notification in the Official Gazette.

Option B directly corresponds to condition (a) of Section 25F.

Retrenchment compensation (condition b) is 15 days’ average pay per year of service, not minimum one or three months’ average pay per year as stated in options C and D. Option A states three months’ notice, which is incorrect; the requirement is one month’s notice or pay in lieu.

55. What is the penalty prescribed under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

What is the penalty prescribed under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for a person who commits any unfair labour practices ?

[amp_mcq option1=”Imprisonment up to 2 months or fine up to ₹ 1,000 or both” option2=”Imprisonment up to 3 months or fine up to ₹ 1,000 or both” option3=”Imprisonment up to 6 months or fine up to ₹ 1,000 or both” option4=”Imprisonment up to 1 year or fine up to ₹ 1,000 or both” correct=”option3″]

This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020
Download PDFAttempt Online
Section 25U of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 prescribes the penalty for committing any unfair labour practice. The penalty is imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.
– Chapter V-C (Sections 25T and 25U) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, deals with unfair labour practices.
– Section 25T prohibits any employer or workman or a trade union from committing any unfair labour practice.
– Section 25U provides the punishment for violating Section 25T.
– Unfair labour practices are listed in the Fifth Schedule to the Act. These include actions like interfering with the right of workmen to organize, dominating or interfering with a trade union, discriminating against workmen for union activities, or engaging in certain forms of coercive or threatening behaviour.
– The prescribed penalty serves as a deterrent against engaging in practices that are considered detrimental to healthy industrial relations.

56. Which one of the following aims at correcting regional imbalances in t

Which one of the following aims at correcting regional imbalances in the availability of affordable and reliable healthcare services by augmenting medical education ?

[amp_mcq option1=”Pradhan Mantri Swasthya Suraksha Yojana” option2=”Swachh Swasth Sarvatra” option3=”Ayushman Bharat” option4=”Rashtriya Arogya Nidhi” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2020
Download PDFAttempt Online
The Pradhan Mantri Swasthya Suraksha Yojana (PMSSY) aims at correcting regional imbalances in healthcare by augmenting medical education and infrastructure.
– PMSSY, launched in 2003, focuses on establishing AIIMS-like institutions in underserved regions and upgrading existing Government Medical Colleges. This directly addresses the stated aim of correcting regional imbalances and augmenting medical education.
– Swachh Swasth Sarvatra is related to sanitation and health in ODF areas.
– Ayushman Bharat is a broader scheme covering health insurance and wellness centres.
– Rashtriya Arogya Nidhi provides financial aid for specific treatments to the poor.
PMSSY is a Centrally Sponsored Scheme that aims to create a robust tertiary healthcare system and improve the quality and accessibility of medical education across India, with a specific focus on regions lacking adequate facilities.

57. What is the maximum time limit given under the Workmen’s Compensation

What is the maximum time limit given under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923, for the dependent to claim compensation in the event of death of the workman arising out of or in course of employment?

[amp_mcq option1=”Six months” option2=”One year” option3=”Two years” option4=”Three years” correct=”option3″]

This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2019
Download PDFAttempt Online
As per Section 10 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 (now called the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923), a claim for compensation shall be preferred before the Commissioner within two years of the accident or, in the case of death, within two years of the date of death.
– The time limit for filing a claim for compensation under the Act is specified in Section 10.
– The standard time limit is two years.
– The period runs from the date of the accident or, if death results from the injury, from the date of the death.
There are provisions for condonation of delay if sufficient cause is shown for not preferring the claim within the stipulated period, but the standard time limit is two years. Options A, B, and D are incorrect regarding the maximum time limit provided by the Act.

58. Which one of the following statements is not correct?

Which one of the following statements is not correct?

[amp_mcq option1=”The contribution payable by the employer to the Provident Fund will be 10 percent of basic wages only.” option2=”The contribution payable by the employer to the Provident Fund will be 10 percent of the basic wages, dearness allowance and retaining allowance.” option3=”The contribution of the employees to the Provident Fund will be also minimum 10 percent.” option4=”If an employee so desires, he/she can contribute more, but the employer will not match this contribution beyond 10 percent.” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2019
Download PDFAttempt Online
The Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (EPF Act) generally requires contributions to be calculated on basic wages, dearness allowance, and retaining allowance. While the standard rate is 12%, the question posits a 10% scenario, which is applicable to certain establishments (e.g., those employing less than 20 persons or specified sick industries). However, the base for calculation remains basic wages, dearness allowance, and retaining allowance, not just basic wages. Therefore, the statement that the contribution is 10 percent of basic wages *only* is incorrect.
– EPF contributions are typically calculated on the total of basic wages, dearness allowance, and retaining allowance.
– The standard contribution rate is 12%, but a 10% rate is applicable under specific conditions.
– Even at the 10% rate, the calculation base usually includes DA and retaining allowance, not just basic wages.
– Employee contribution is generally equal to the employer’s contribution.
– Employees can voluntarily contribute more than the statutory minimum, but employers are not obligated to match the excess amount.
Statement B correctly identifies the base for calculation. Statement C is correct as the employee contribution matches the employer’s minimum (10% in this scenario) and can be higher. Statement D correctly describes the rule regarding voluntary higher contributions. Statement A incorrectly limits the calculation base to basic wages *only*.

59. As per the doctrine of ‘added peril’, as applied to the Workmen’s Comp

As per the doctrine of ‘added peril’, as applied to the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923, a workman cannot hold his employer liable for the risk if at the time of accident the employee

[amp_mcq option1=”undertakes to do something which the employee is not ordinarily required to do and involves extra danger” option2=”remains absent from place where he/she is supposed to work” option3=”is under the influence of alcohol on duty” option4=”is working on an overtime assignment” correct=”option1″]

This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2019
Download PDFAttempt Online
The doctrine of ‘added peril’ under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 (now Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923) states that if a workman, while performing their duty, introduces a new risk or danger which is not part of their ordinary employment, and an accident occurs due to this added risk, the employer is generally not held liable for compensation. Option A accurately describes this: the employee undertakes something not ordinarily required, involving extra danger. Options B, C, and D might relate to potential defenses or considerations in a compensation claim (like being outside the scope of employment, misconduct, or working hours), but they do not define the doctrine of ‘added peril’.
– The doctrine applies when a workman increases the risk of injury by doing something outside the scope of their normal duties or in a manner not required or expected.
– The added peril must be the direct cause of the accident.
– If the employer authorized or acquiesced in the activity, the doctrine may not apply.
The Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923 provides for compensation to workmen (now employees) and their dependents in case of injury or death caused by an accident arising out of and in the course of employment. The doctrine of added peril is a common law concept applied in the interpretation of “arising out of employment”.

60. Which of the following are included under the Employees’ Provident Fun

Which of the following are included under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952?

Select the correct answer using the code given below.

  • 1. Employees’ Provident Fund
  • 2. Employees’ Deposit Linked Insurance Scheme
  • 3. Employees’ Permanent Total Disablement Pension
  • 4. Pension of the Employees’ Widows

[amp_mcq option1=”2, 3 and 4 only” option2=”1 and 4 only” option3=”1, 2 and 3 only” option4=”1, 2, 3 and 4″ correct=”option4″]

This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2019
Download PDFAttempt Online
The Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, is an umbrella Act that empowers the government to frame various schemes for the welfare of employees. The schemes framed under this Act include:
1. The Employees’ Provident Fund Scheme (EPF)
2. The Employees’ Pension Scheme (EPS), 1995 (which provides for various pensions, including disablement and widow pensions)
3. The Employees’ Deposit Linked Insurance Scheme (EDLI)
Therefore, the benefits like Employees’ Permanent Total Disablement Pension (which is a type of disablement pension under EPS) and Pension of the Employees’ Widows (also under EPS) are provided through schemes established under the 1952 Act. All four listed items are either the main schemes or types of benefits provided under the schemes framed by the Act.
– The EPF & MP Act, 1952 is the parent Act for three main schemes: EPF, EPS, and EDLI.
– The Employees’ Pension Scheme (EPS) provides for various forms of pension, including superannuation pension, disability pension, widow pension, and children pension.
– The Employees’ Deposit Linked Insurance Scheme (EDLI) provides life insurance cover.
The Act applies to establishments employing 20 or more persons and engaged in any of the industries specified in Schedule I or notified by the Central Government.
Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5