- (1.) THE dispute in this appeal relates to the payment of contribution under the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), in respect of casual employees engaged for purposes of loading and unloading. The respondent-Company is engaged in the work of export of garments, which is a partnership-firm. The appellant-Corporation demanded contribution in respect of three items and the same was challenged before the Employees' Insurance Court, Jaipur in respect of two items and now it is confined to contribution payable on Rs. 62,929 on account of loading and unloading charges. The learned Judge of the Employees' State Insurance Court has arrived at the conclusion that this sum of Rs. 62,929 was paid for purposes of loading and unloading but it was not paid to persons employed by the firm and on account of payment made to casual or stray workers contribution under the Act is not payable.
(2.) AGAINST this decision dated February 19, 1980 the Corporation has preferred this appeal Mr. J. K. Daswani, who was the manager of the respondent at Jaipur gave his affidavit and was cross examined on the same and according to him the loading and unloading charges were paid to various truck owners or contractors or their nominees and for this purpose they had not employed any staff. According to him, the payment varied according to load and it could not be said that there were persons on the roll for purposes of this job. However, in cross-examination he has admitted that mostly loading and unloading was done at the factory itself and it was only on rare occasions that goods were collected from the office of the textile company.
(3.) THE Corporation determined the contribution under Section 45-A of the Act on April 23, 1986, along with interest and this relates to the period of April, 1976 to August, 1977. The appeal before this Court is preferred under Section 82 of the Act and Sub-clause (2) of this says that appeal shall lie to the High Court from an order of the Employees' Insurance Court if it involves a substantial question of law. Learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board v. Employees' State Insurance Corporation, (1977-ILLJ-54) (AP), and Regional Director, ESIC, Bangalore v. Davangere Cotton Mills (1977-II-LLJ-404) (Kant ).;