With reference to casual workers employed in India, consider the following statements : 1. All casual workers are entitled for Employees Provident Fund coverage. 2. All casual workers are entitled for regular working hours and overtime payment. 3. The government can by a notification specify that an establishment or industry shall pay wages only through its bank account. Which of the above statements are correct?

States the statutory trigger for EPF: establishments with more than 20 workers must register with EPFO, and only employees with salary up to Rs.15,000 contribute to EPF—implying not every worker in every workplace is automatically covered.

A student could combine this with the fact that many casual workers earn daily wages or higher/lower pay to infer that some casuals (in small workplaces or above the salary threshold) may be outside mandatory EPF coverage and thus test the statement.

Explains the Code on Social Security rule: EPFO coverage applies to establishments having 20 or more workers and smaller establishments may join voluntarily—showing coverage depends on establishment size.

By noting that many casual workers are employed in small establishments or the unorganised sector, a student can suspect that many casuals lack mandatory EPF entitlement and seek confirmation.

Defines casual workers as daily-wage employees who are not given social security benefits like provident fund, explicitly linking casual status to typical exclusion from PF.

A student could use this definition plus data on the composition of casual employment to judge whether 'all casual workers' would realistically be covered by EPF.

Notes absence of regulations protecting freelancers and mentions lack of retirement benefits for many workers in gig/informal economy, indicating gaps in social security coverage for non-regular workers.

Combine with knowledge that casual workers often work informally or in gig arrangements to infer many may be outside statutory EPF coverage, prompting targeted verification.