ROYAL TALKIES HYDERABAD Vs. EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Law is essentially the formal expression of the regulation of economic relations in society. That is the key note thought in this case, where the core question is: who is an employee Secondly, to decide the meaning of a welfare measure a feeling for the soul of the measure is a surer guide than meticulous dissection with lexical tools alone.

(2.) The definitional amplitude of 'employee' in section 2 (9) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, (hereinafter referred to as the Act), is the sole contentious issue canvassed by counsel at the bar. We have heard Shri Chitale for the appellant and the learned Attorney General for the respondent-Corporation at some length, because a decision by this court as to the width of the definition and consequential fallout of statutory obligations may cover a considerable number of establishments. We have granted leave to appeal on that basis and now proceed to study the anatomy of 'employee' as defined in section 2(9) of the Act.

(3.) A brief factual narration may help get a hang of the case. The High Court, before which the present appellants had filed these appeals, has summarised the facts succinctly thus: