JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) These appeals have been filed against the common
impugned judgment and order dated 30.10.2002 of the High
Court of Kerala at Ernakulam whereby the appeal filed by the
respondent-Employees State Insurance Corporation
(hereinafter for short the 'ESIC') under Section 82(2) of
the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter for
short 'the Act') has been allowed and the appeal filed by
the appellant herein has been dismissed.
(3.) It appears that a demand notice was sent against the
appellant company under Section 45A of the Act in respect of
the employers contribution under the Act. The appellant
challenged the said demand notice by filing a petition under
Section 75 of the Act before the Employees Insurance Court,
Alleppey. The Employees Insurance Court in its order dated
4.2.1993 made the following observations:-
"12. If reliance is made on the rational
laid down by the High Court in the abovesaid
decisions it is very clear that the identities
of the employees should be an essential factor
for bringing under coverage employees and
paying contribution in respect of them. Here,
in this case, because of the peculiar nature
of the work arrangement, at Depots, it is
impossible to register an employee engaged in
the loading and unloading work under the ESI
Scheme. If there is requirement, a group of
headload workers will come and they do the
work collectively and payments are received on
tonnage basis. On behalf of this group
engaged, one person will collect payment from
the depot and distribute the same among
themselves. Such labourers coming on one day
may not be the same in next day. That is
because of this peculiar nature of arrangement
among workers on the basis of understanding or
agreement reached between trade unions. After
completing work in the depot they will go
elsewhere and do identical nature of work. If
such is the nature of work it is quite
improper to compel the applicant to pay
contribution on the payments given in various
depots merely because they obtained the
services of such workers. However as a
principal employer the applicant cannot
absolve themselves from the responsibility of
covering such employees under the scheme
because those employees are rendering service
to them. Therefore it would be appropriate
that in close co-operation with the ESI
Corporation they should take effort at least
now to ascertain the identities of those
headload workers so as to cover them also
under the ESI Scheme. The ESI Corporation
will also make immediate arrangement for
bringing all the loading and unloading workers
in the depots under the ESI Scheme. The ESI
Corporation shall work out the modus operandi
for bringing these workers under the coverage.
On such registration of the headload workers
under the scheme, the applicant will pay
contribution from the date of passing of the
order passed under Sec. 45-A of the ESI Act
viz., 15.6.1989. The ESI corporation shall
work out the contribution from that date in
respect of workers who are brought under
scheme and who were found to be working from
that day onwards.
With the above observation and
direction, this application is disposed of.";
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.