- (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by Shri T. K. Banerjee, the learned Judge, Employees' Insurance Court, in the Case No 39 of 1973 whereby the learned Judge allowed the application under Section 75 of the Employees' State Insurance Act (hereinafter referred to. as the act ).
(2.) M/s. Ashok Plastics Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the company) filed the application under Section 75 of the Act disputing the demand made by the Employees' State Insurance Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the E. S. I. Corporation) for payment of employer's special contribution and employees' contribution on the allowance paid to Shri Sohanlal Gupta as a Director of the Company, and praying for the declaration that Shri Sohanlal Gupta, a Director of the Company was not the employee within the meaning of Section 2 (9) of the Act, that the monthly allowance paid to "shri Gupta was not the 'wages' within the meaning of Section 2 (22) of the Act and that the company was not liable to pay the employer's special contribution on the allowance paid to Shri Sohanlal Gupta as a Director of the Company and for injunction.
(3.) THE- case of the company in brief was as follows : -The Company used to carry on business of manufacturing and sale of plastic products and it had its factory at 13/1, Dharmatala road, Belurmath, Howrah. The 'company was liable to pay employees' contribution and also employer's special contribution in respect of the wages paid or payable to its employees. Shri Sohanlal Gupta was a Director of the Company and he was being paid the sum of Rs. 300/-per month by way of special allowance. Shri Gupta was not an employee of the Company and there was no relationship of master and servant between the Company and Shri Gupta. Shri Gupta was receiving Rs. 300/-per month as special allowance in his capacity as a Director and not as 'wages' within the meaning of Section 2 (22) of the Act. As a Director he was entrusted with some works of the factory but he, was not an employee within the meaning of Section 2 (9) of the Act. The monthly allowance paid to Shri Gupta being not the wages did not come under the coverage of the- Act. The Company accordingly was not liable to pay the employer's special contribution and Shri Gupta was also not liable to pay any contribution on the allowance received by him under the Act. The E. S. 1. Corporation, however, demanded payment of employer's special contribution in respect of the allowance paid to Shri gupta for the quarters ended on 1. 10. 68 to 31. 3. 72 and also employees' contribution for the said quarters. The Company informed the E. S. I. Corporation that the monthly allowance paid to Shri Gupta as a Director did not come under the coverage of the Act and accordingly the company was not liable to make any payment of such contributions. The Company was intimated that Shri Gupta was not an employee of the Company and that the allowance was being paid to him as a Director of the Company. The E. S. I. Corporation, however, did not accept the contention of the Company but took necessary steps for realisation of the amount of the aforesaid contributions with the help of the Revenue recovery Act and the Bengal Public Demand Recovery Act. The company accordingly filed the application in question for the relief as already indicated.;