[Analysis] Nine Acts Subsumed in the Code on Social Security 2020 – Chapter Map | Repeal | Savings

Nine Acts were subsumed in the Code on Social Security, 2020, and section 164(1) repeals them by name. Eight of the nine reappear as a chapter of the Code. The ninth, the Cine-Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1981, survives only in two definitions; its Fund, its Welfare Commissioners and its Advisory Committees have no successor. Section 164(2) saves what was done under the repealed Acts, but the one-year protection for the old EPF and ESI subordinate legislation runs out on 20 November 2026.

Law stated as on 1 September 2026. The Code on Social Security, 2020 was brought into force in stages, the bulk of it with effect from 21 November 2025.

Table of Contents

1. The nine Acts the Code repealed
2. Where each Act went
3. The Act that got no chapter
4. One definition doing the work of six
5. What consolidation actually changed
6. Section 164: what survives the repeal
7. The one-year clock, and when it stops
8. Section 6 of the General Clauses Act
9. What the courts have said so far
10. Frequently asked questions
11. Conclusion

1. The nine Acts the Code repealed

Section 164(1) of the Code on Social Security, 2020 does not repeal by description. It lists the enactments, in order, with their Act numbers:

1. The Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923)
2. The Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948)
3. The Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (19 of 1952)
4. The Employment Exchanges (Compulsory Notification of Vacancies) Act, 1959 (31 of 1959)
5. The Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 (53 of 1961)
6. The Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (39 of 1972)
7. The Cine-Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1981 (33 of 1981)
8. The Building and Other Construction Workers’ Welfare Cess Act, 1996 (28 of 1996)
9. The Unorganised Workers’ Social Security Act, 2008 (33 of 2008)

Two things about that list repay attention. It spans eighty-five years, from a 1923 statute drafted for an industrial economy to a 2008 statute drafted for an informal one. And it is not a list of the four labour codes’ combined casualties; these nine are the social security ones alone. The Ministry of Labour and Employment’s Compliance Handbook for Employers under the Four Labour Codes sets the social security Code beside the other three. The general structure of the Code is covered in our note on the Code on Social Security, 2020.

2. Where each Act went

Applicability is set by section 1(4) read with the First Schedule, and each of the eight surviving Acts occupies its own chapter. The chapter is the unit that matters: an establishment can be inside Chapter III and outside Chapter IV, and the thresholds differ.

Repealed Act	Chapter	Applies to
Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952	III	Every establishment with twenty or more employees
Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948	IV	Every establishment with ten or more persons, other than a seasonal factory
Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972	V	Factories, mines, oilfields, plantations, ports and railway companies; shops and establishments with ten or more employees
Maternity Benefit Act, 1961	VI	Factories, mines and plantations; shops and establishments with ten or more employees
Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923	VII	Employers and employees to whom Chapter IV does not apply, subject to the Second Schedule
Building and Other Construction Workers’ Welfare Cess Act, 1996	VIII	Every establishment falling under building and other construction work
Unorganised Workers’ Social Security Act, 2008	IX	Unorganised sector, unorganised workers, gig workers and platform workers
Employment Exchanges (Compulsory Notification of Vacancies) Act, 1959	XIII	Career centres, vacancies, persons seeking their services, and employers
Cine-Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1981	None	See section 3 below

Chapter numbering does not follow the chronology of the Acts, and there is no chapter for section 1 of anything: Chapters I and II carry the preliminary provisions and the Social Security Organisations, and Chapters X to XIV carry the machinery that all the benefit chapters now share.

3. The Act that got no chapter

The Cine-Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1981 is the one entry on the section 164(1) list with nothing to point to. Set its eleven provisions against the Code and most of the right-hand column is empty:

Cine-Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1981	Code on Social Security, 2020
Section 2(a) Cinematograph film; 2(c) Feature film	Section 2(4), audio-visual production
Section 2(b) Cine worker	Section 2(26), employee
Section 2(e) Prescribed	Section 2(65), prescribed
Section 2(d) Fund; 2(f) Producer	No corresponding provision
Section 3 Cine-workers Welfare Fund	No corresponding provision
Section 4 Application of Fund	No corresponding provision
Sections 5 to 7 Advisory Committees	No corresponding provision
Section 8 Appointment of Welfare Commissioners and their powers	No corresponding provision
Sections 9 and 10 Annual report; power to call for information	No corresponding provision
Section 11 Power to make rules	Section 155

What carried across is vocabulary. A cine worker is now an employee under section 2(26); a cinematograph film and a feature film are now an audio-visual production under section 2(4). What did not carry across is the institution. There is no Cine-Workers Welfare Fund under the Code, no Welfare Commissioner appointed for it, and no Advisory Committee to oversee it.

That is not an oversight so much as a change of method. The film worker is no longer served by a dedicated fund with its own officers; he is served, if at all, as an employee of an establishment under the benefit chapters, or as an unorganised worker under Chapter IX. Whether that is a better arrangement for a workforce that is overwhelmingly project-based and intermittently employed is a fair question, and the Code does not answer it.

4. One definition doing the work of six

The consolidation that changes payroll numbers is not the chapter structure. It is section 2.

Section 2(26), “employee”, is the successor to six separate definitions: section 2(b) of the Cine-Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1981, section 2(e) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, section 2(1)(dd) of the Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923, section 2(9) of the ESI Act, 1948, section 2(f) of the EPF and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, and section 2(b) of the Employment Exchanges Act, 1959.

Section 2(88), “wages”, is the successor to five: section 2(1)(m) of the 1923 Act, section 2(s) of the Gratuity Act, section 2(22) of the ESI Act, section 2(b) of the EPF Act, and section 3(n) of the Maternity Benefit Act.

Under the old regime an employer could be running five different wage bases in one payroll, because each Act defined wages for its own purposes. Under the Code there is one base, and its first proviso adds back any excluded component to the extent it exceeds one half of all remuneration. A structure built around the old definitions will not simply carry over; it has to be re-tested against a single definition that is deliberately harder to engineer around.

5. What consolidation actually changed

Four changes follow from putting nine Acts in one place, and they are procedural rather than substantive.

One registration. Section 3(1) requires every establishment to which the Code applies to be registered electronically or otherwise. The proviso does the work: an establishment already registered under any other Central labour law is not required to register again, and that registration is deemed to be registration for the purposes of the Code. Section 3 corresponds to section 2A of the ESI Act, 1948, which had required a separate registration for that Act alone.

One assessment route. Determination of dues now runs through section 125 whichever chapter the money is owed under, in place of section 45A of the ESI Act, section 7A of the EPF Act and their equivalents.

One recovery route. Sections 129 to 132 replace the recovery provisions of each individual Act, and section 132 applies specified provisions of the Income-tax Act to that recovery.

One penalty provision. Section 133 replaces section 14 of the EPF Act, sections 84 and 85 of the ESI Act, section 9 of the Gratuity Act, section 18A of the 1923 Act, section 7 of the Employment Exchanges Act, sections 21 and 22 of the Maternity Benefit Act, and section 12 of the BOCW Cess Act. Nine provisions drawn from seven Acts now sit in one section with four punishment limbs.

What did not change is the entitlements. Twenty-six weeks of maternity benefit is still twenty-six weeks; the relevant factor in the Sixth Schedule is the same table it was in the 1923 Act. An employer who knew the old Acts will find the benefits familiar and the procedure unfamiliar, which is the opposite of what most consolidation exercises produce.

6. Section 164: what survives the repeal

Section 164(2) opens with “Notwithstanding such repeal” and then saves three categories.

Clause (a) saves the past. Anything done or any action taken under the repealed enactments, including any rule, regulation, notification (expressly including State notifications), scheme, appointment, order or direction, or any benefit provided under them, is deemed to have been done under the corresponding provisions of the Code. The saving is not unconditional. It holds only to the extent those things are not contrary to the Code, and only until they are repealed under the corresponding provisions of the Code by the appropriate Government.

Clause (b) saves four named instruments, and only for a year. The Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, the Employees’ Deposit Linked Insurance Scheme, 1976, the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995 and the Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1997, together with the rules, regulations and schemes made under the ESI Act, 1948, remain in force to the extent they are not inconsistent with the Code, for one year from commencement.

Clause (c) saves exemptions. Any exemption given under a repealed enactment continues until its validity expires, or it ceases to operate under the Code, or a direction is made for that purpose. An exemption granted under section 17 of the EPF Act does not need to be re-applied for on day one.

Section 164(3) then adds that, without prejudice to sub-section (2), section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 applies to the repeal.

7. The one-year clock, and when it stops

Clause (b) is the only part of section 164 with a date attached, and the date is close.

The Code commenced on 21 November 2025. One year from commencement therefore expires on 20 November 2026. After that, the old EPF schemes and the ESI Act’s subordinate legislation are no longer saved by section 164(2)(b), whatever their state.

In practice the Central Government has been closing the gap ahead of the deadline. The Social Security (Central) Rules, 2026 were notified on 8 May 2026 by G.S.R. 344(E), expressly in supersession of the Employees’ State Insurance (Central) Rules, 1950 among others. The Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 2026, the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 2026 and the Employees’ Deposit-Linked Insurance Scheme, 2026 were notified on 29 June 2026 by G.S.R. 525(E), 527(E) and 526(E), superseding the 1952, 1995 and 1976 schemes.

What remains is the residue: anything still resting on an ESI regulation made by the Corporation rather than on a rule made by the Central Government. Regulations of that kind were saved by clause (b) rather than superseded by the 2026 Rules, and clause (b) is what stops on 20 November 2026. Any process still running on one of them should be identified before then rather than after. Notifications and rules as they issue are tracked on Taxmann.com | Research.

8. Section 6 of the General Clauses Act

Section 164(3) imports section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, which is the default rule for what a repeal does not disturb. Unless a different intention appears, a repeal shall not:

• revive anything not in force or existing at the time the repeal takes effect;
• affect the previous operation of any enactment so repealed, or anything duly done or suffered under it;
• affect any right, privilege, obligation or liability acquired, accrued or incurred under it;
• affect any penalty, forfeiture or punishment incurred for an offence against it; or
• affect any investigation, legal proceeding or remedy in respect of any such right, privilege, obligation, liability, penalty, forfeiture or punishment.

Any such investigation, proceeding or remedy may be instituted, continued or enforced, and any such penalty imposed, as if the repealing Act had not been passed.

The point most often missed is what the Supreme Court settled in T.S. Baliah: section 6 applies to a repeal even where there is a simultaneous re-enactment, unless a contrary intention can be gathered from the new statute. The question is not whether the new Act expressly keeps old rights alive, but whether it manifests an intention to destroy them, and the mere absence of a saving clause is by itself not material.[1] Gajraj Singh states the same rule for repeal-and-re-enactment.[2]

There is a limit. Section 6 saves an accrued right; it does not create one. Where a new Act confers a right, it does so prospectively from commencement unless it says otherwise.[3] And where a provision is simply omitted and replaced without a saving for pending proceedings, the inference is that pending proceedings do not continue, though fresh proceedings may be begun under the new provision.[4]

9. What the courts have said so far

The labour codes have been in force long enough to produce a first line of authority on continuity, and five 2026 High Court decisions are worth knowing about. None of them is a Social Security Code case on all fours, which is itself the point: the questions are arising across all four codes, and the answers are being given on general repeal principles.

• The savings clause under the Code on Wages, 2019 protects actions taken under the old law.[5]
• A new welfare cess scheme may be framed under the Code on Social Security, 2020.[6]
• Authorities under the Industrial Disputes Act continue to function until authorities are appointed under the Industrial Relations Code.[7]
• A reference order made before the retrospective repeal of the Industrial Disputes Act remains valid.[8]
• The Industrial Disputes Act and the Standing Orders Act have not been repealed yet.[9]

The direction of travel is towards continuity rather than rupture, which is what section 164(2) and section 6 of the General Clauses Act would both predict. What has not yet been tested under this Code is the harder case: a proceeding begun under a repealed Act that runs into a limitation period the Code introduced and the old Act did not have.

10. Frequently asked questions

Which Acts are subsumed in the Code on Social Security 2020?

Nine, listed by name in section 164(1): the Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923; the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948; the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952; the Employment Exchanges (Compulsory Notification of Vacancies) Act, 1959; the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961; the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972; the Cine-Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1981; the Building and Other Construction Workers’ Welfare Cess Act, 1996; and the Unorganised Workers’ Social Security Act, 2008.

How many laws did the Social Security Code replace?

Nine. Eight of them became a chapter of the Code. The ninth, the Cine-Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1981, has no chapter: only its definitions of cine worker, cinematograph film, feature film and prescribed have counterparts, in sections 2(26), 2(4) and 2(65).

Is the Employees’ Provident Funds Act 1952 still in force?

No. It was repealed by section 164(1) of the Code on Social Security, 2020. Its subject matter is now Chapter III of the Code, sections 14 to 23. The schemes made under it survived separately under section 164(2)(b) for one year from commencement, but the Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995 and the Employees’ Deposit Linked Insurance Scheme, 1976 were superseded on 29 June 2026 by the corresponding 2026 schemes.

Do old notifications and exemptions still apply under the Code?

Largely yes. Section 164(2)(a) deems anything done under a repealed Act, including rules, regulations, notifications, schemes, appointments, orders and directions, to have been done under the corresponding provision of the Code, so long as it is not contrary to the Code and until it is repealed by the appropriate Government. Section 164(2)(c) separately continues any exemption granted under a repealed Act until its validity expires or it ceases to operate under the Code.

What is the difference between the new labour codes and the old labour laws?

For social security, the entitlements are largely carried over and the machinery is not. One definition of employee replaced six, one definition of wages replaced five, registration became single under section 3, assessment moved to section 125, recovery to sections 129 to 132, and penalties to section 133. The chapters retain separate applicability thresholds, so being covered by one chapter does not mean being covered by another.

11. Conclusion

Nine Acts, one Code, and the mapping is close enough to be traced provision by provision but not close enough to be assumed. Most of the friction sits in three places: the single wage definition, which changes the base on which contributions and gratuity are computed; the common machinery in Chapters XI to XIV, which changed the procedure without changing the entitlements; and section 164, where the answer to whether an old instrument still binds depends on which clause of sub-section (2) it falls under.

The deadline to have in the diary is 20 November 2026, when the one-year protection in section 164(2)(b) lapses.

Taxmann’s Law & Practice Relating to Code on Social Security is built around this mapping. It opens with a twenty-four page table running the Code section by section against the corresponding provisions of the repealed laws, followed by nine reverse tables, one per repealed Act, taking each old section to its counterpart in the Code or recording that it has none. That is where the empty cells in section 3 above come from.

Chapter by chapter, we have covered EPF under Chapter III, ESI under Chapter IV, gratuity under Chapter V, maternity benefit under Chapter VI and employee’s compensation under Chapter VII.

---

[1] T.S. Baliah v. ITO, AIR 1969 SC 701.

[2] Gajraj Singh v. State, (1997) 1 SCC 650.

[3] State of Punjab v. Bhajan Kaur, (2008) 12 SCC 112 : (2009) 1 SCC (Cri) 328.

[4] Kolhapur Canesugar Works Ltd. v. Union of India, (2000) 2 SCC 536 : 2000 taxmann.com 1065.

[5] Tech Mahindra Ltd. v. Union of India, 2026 LLR 128 (Bom).

[6] Salem Mandala Manuneddhi Amaipuchara Mattrum Kattumana Thozhirchanga M v. Government of Tamil Nadu, 2026 LLR 130 (Mad).

[7] N.A. Sebastian v. Union of India, 2026 LLR 256 (Del).

[8] Glastronix LLP v. President/General Secretary, Glastronix Karmika Sangha, 2026 LLR 390 (Karn).

[9] United Labour of Federation v. Union of India, 2026 LLR 135 (Mad).