Thilakaratne vs. Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Gampaha – sllr 2020 volume 2 page 035

In the case between Thilakaratne (petitioner) and the Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Gampaha (respondent), the court addressed the issue of liability for Employees’ Provident Fund (EPF) dues under the EPF Act. The petitioner challenged the lower court orders that held him liable as an employer under the EPF Act, contending that no employer–employee relationship existed between him and the workmen in question. The court held that sufficient control and integration in the relationship had been established to qualify the petitioner as an employer for the purposes of the Act, reaffirming the principle that employer status is determined based on control, integration, and statutory definitions, rather than contractual labels alone. This decision relied on the interpretation of sections 38(2)