SAHNI SILK MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION
LAWS(SC)-1994-7-37
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on July 14,1994

Sahni Silk Mills Private Limited Appellant
VERSUS
EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

MUNGONI V.AS.G. OF NORTHERN RHODESIA [REFERRED TO]
ALLAM AND CO. V. EUROPA POSTER SERVICES LTD. [REFERRED TO]
H. LAVENDER AND SONS LTD. V. MINISTER OF HOUSING AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT [REFERRED TO]
EMPLOYEES' STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION V. DHANDA ENGINEERS PVT. LTD. FARIDABAD [REFERRED TO]
EMPLOYEES' STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION,BANGALORE V. SHOBA ENGINEERS,BANGALORE [REFERRED TO]
HARISHANKAR BAGLA VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRADHAR GOSWAMI VS. GAUHATI BANK LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
MANGULAL CHUNILAL VS. MANILAL MAGANLAL [REFERRED TO]
RAMESHWAR JUTE MILLS LTD VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

MOUNT ABU EDUCATION SOCIETY VS. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY [LAWS(DLH)-2003-5-76] [REFERRED]
MOUNT ABU EDUCATION SOCIETY VS. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY [LAWS(DLH)-2005-9-56] [REFERRED TO]
HINDUSTAN MONARK P LTD VS. EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION [LAWS(ALL)-1997-4-33] [REFERRED TO]
KAUSHAL PRASAD KASHYAP VS. STATE OF M P [LAWS(MPH)-1998-10-13] [REFERRED TO]
DUSTVEN P LTD VS. E S I CORPN [LAWS(KAR)-2003-11-62] [REFERRED TO]
GNANAMBIKA MILLS LIMITED COIMBATORE VS. DIRECTOR GENERAL EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION NEW DELHI [LAWS(MAD)-1996-2-57] [REFERRED TO]
REGIONAL DIRECTOR EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPN VS. SAMOSONS RUBBER INDUSTRIES LTD [LAWS(MAD)-1999-1-4] [REFERRED TO]
N K HARCHANDANI VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2006-4-142] [REFERRED TO]
PANCHAYAT BOARD TURINCHIKUPPAM VS. INSPECTOR OF PANCHAYAT THIRUVANNAMALAI [LAWS(MAD)-2008-3-359] [REFERRED TO]
VASUDEV VYAS VS. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD [LAWS(RAJ)-2008-6-6] [REFERRED TO]
SANDEEP SHUKLA VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2012-7-35] [REFERRED TO]
M.GANGADHARAN NAIR VS. COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, KOZHIKODE [LAWS(KER)-2013-7-147] [REFERRED TO 5.]
NAGESHWAR BHAGAT VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2013-10-56] [REFERRED TO]
LAKHAN AGRAWAL AND ANOTHER VS. M.P. STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION, INDORE AND OTHERS [LAWS(MPH)-2002-8-116] [REFERRED TO]
DIRECTOR GENERAL ESI VS. T ABDUL RAZAK [LAWS(SC)-1996-7-124] [RELIED ON]
NAND LAL JAISWAL VS. SECY GOVT OF U P ENERGY DEPTT CIVIL SECTT LKO [LAWS(ALL)-2012-1-26] [REFERRED TO]
PANDAN KRISHNAN VS. ASST ENGINEER KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD REGIONAL OFFICE [LAWS(KER)-1994-12-26] [REFERRED TO]
SATHYDEVAN VS. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION [LAWS(KER)-2007-10-15] [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. DIKSHA SINGH [LAWS(ALL)-2011-8-221] [REFERRED TO]
NALANDA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY VS. GOVERNMENT OF A P [LAWS(APH)-2010-8-13] [REFRRED TO]
HARUN ALI MALLICK VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2010-8-34] [REFERRED TO]
SHAMIM AHMED VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(GAU)-2010-9-41] [REFERRED TO]
V K GAUR VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2010-10-45] [REFERRED TO]
N N PATHAK VS. JAWAHARLAL NEHRU KRISHI VISHWAVIDYALAYA [LAWS(MPH)-2012-7-210] [REFERRED TO]
U.P. AVAS EVAM VS. OM PRAKASH SHARMA [LAWS(SC)-2013-4-65] [REFERRED TO]
PRAKASH PARCEL SERVICE LIMITED VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2013-5-89] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. B.V.GOPINATH [LAWS(SC)-2013-9-15] [REFERRED TO]
BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE VS. MAHTANI VENTURES [LAWS(KAR)-2013-2-235] [REFERRED TO]
M/S. EMPEE DISTILLERIES LIMITED VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2013-10-156] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF JHARKHAND VS. JAISHREE JHA [LAWS(JHAR)-2014-1-40] [REFERRED TO]
DECEASED MANGUBEN RATILAL THAKKAR VS. STATE OF GUJARAT- DEPT OF AGRICULTURE AND COOPERATION [LAWS(GJH)-2014-6-68] [REFERRED TO]
ULTRA TECH CEMENT LIMITED VS. THE UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(KER)-2014-9-82] [REFERRED TO]
SHIVAM WATER TREATERS P LTD VS. STATE BANK OF INDIA [LAWS(GJH)-2013-9-250] [REFERRED TO]
N K HARCHANDANI VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA; NAGPUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION [LAWS(BOM)-2006-4-200] [REFERRED]
NCERT & ANR VS. SURINDER NATH & ANR [LAWS(DLH)-2010-6-115] [REFERRED]
SMT. SALMA KHATOON VS. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2016-8-327] [REFERRED TO]
N N PATHAK AND ORS VS. JAWAHARLAL NEHRU KRISHI VISHWA VIDYALAYA AND OTHER [LAWS(MPH)-2012-7-284] [REFERRED]
ADEITA PRASAD DAS VS. COMMISSIONER OF CONSOLIDATION, BHUBANESWAR AND OTHERS [LAWS(ORI)-2016-9-56] [REFERRED]
EMPEE DISTILLERIES LIMITED (POWER DIVISION) VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2013-10-263] [REFERRED]
TELEWORLD MOBILES PVT LTD VS. COMMISSIONER OF TRADE &TAXES [LAWS(DLH)-2018-1-208] [REFERRED TO]
NRUPAL NARENDRABHAI DALWADI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT THRO SECRETARY [LAWS(GJH)-2017-5-156] [REFERRED TO]
MANGUBEN RATILAL THAKKAR (DECD) VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2014-6-191] [REFERRED TO]
GORAKHPUR TEXPARK PRIVATE LTD VS. STATE OF U P THRU PRINCIPAL SECRY , INDUSTRIAL DEVP & ORS [LAWS(ALL)-2018-7-11] [REFERRED TO]
RAJEEV AGARWAL VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2019-8-114] [REFERRED TO]
SUPERTON ELECTRONICS PRIVATE LIMITED VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2019-3-162] [REFERRED TO]
NATHALAL MAGANLAL CHAUHAN VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2020-2-342] [REFERRED TO]
INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION, TAMIL NADU VS. K.BASKARAN [LAWS(SC)-2020-6-13] [REFERRED TO]
KESHAV PRASAD DUBEY VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2019-12-431] [REFERRED TO]
PSA IMPEX PRIVATE LTD. VS. REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LKO [LAWS(ALL)-2021-3-58] [REFERRED TO]
M/S. NEWTECH PROMOTERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(SC)-2021-11-19] [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. ALCON RESORT HOLDING LIMITED [LAWS(BOM)-2022-4-60] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)The Regional Directors of the Employees' State Insurance Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') issued notices under Section 85-B of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to the appellants between the years 1979 to 1981, stating that they proposed to impose damages against the appellants because there had been delay on the part of the appellants in making payment of the contribution, in accordance with the provisions of the said Act. Different amounts were mentioned in the said notices which were to be imposed, as damages against the different appellants. The appellants in pursuance to the notices aforesaid submitted their explanations indicating the reasons and circumstances, because of which the delay had occurred. The Regional Directors passed orders on different dates against the different appellants imposing damages, for the period in question. Being aggrieved by those orders the appellants filed petitions under Section 75 of the Act before the Employees' Insurance court. The Employees' Insurance court dismissed the petitions. Thereafter appeals were filed under Section 82 of the Act before the High court which were dismissed in limine.
(2.)Before this court, the validity of the impugned orders has been questioned on the ground that the power under Section 85-B could not have been exercised by the Regional Directors of the Corporation; it could have been exercised either by the Corporation or by the Director General of the said Corporation.
(3.)Section 3 of the Act provides for the establishment of the Employees' State Insurance Corporation and Section 4 provides for constitution of Standing Committee for the Corporation. Section 85-B vests power in the Corporation to recover from the employer such damages as it may think fit, whenever an employer fails to pay the amount due in respect of anycontribution or any other amount payable under the said Act. Section 85-B on the relevant date was as follows:
"85-B.power to recover damages. (1 Where an employer fails to pay the amount due in respect of any contribution or any other amount payable under this Act, the Corporation may recover from the employer such damages not exceeding the amount of arrears as it may think fit to impose: Provided that before recovering such damages, the employer shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. (2 Any damages recoverable under Ss. (1 may be recovered as an arrear of land revenue. "in view of Section 94-A the Corporation may delegate any of its powers to any officer or authority subordinate to the Corporation.

"94-A.delegation of powers. The Corporation, and subject to any regulations made by the Corporation in this behalf, the Standing Committee may direct that all or any of the powers and functions which may be exercised or performed by the Corporation or the Standing Committee, as the case may be, may, in relation to such matters and subject to such conditions, if any, as may be specified, be also exercisable by any officer or authority subordinate to the Corporation. "

;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.