Back
2016 Supreme(SC) 206
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V. Gopala Gowda, Arun Mishra, JJ.
Royal Western India Turf Club Ltd. – Appellant
Vs.
E.S.I. Corporation & Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 49 of 2006, 1575/2006, 3421/2012, & 3422/2012
Decided on : 29-02-2016
IMPORTANT POINT
Casual workers cannot be deprived of the beneficial provisions of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948.
Headnote:(a) Interpretation of statute – Welfare statute – Required to be interpreted so as to ensure extension of benefits to the employees and not to deprive them of the same which are available under the Act. (Para 5)
(b) Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 – Section 2(29) r/w section 39(5), 42(2), 2(22) and 2(23) – Term employee covers casual employees employed for part of wage period – No particular period has been prescribed for an employee to have worked for availing benefit u/s 42(2) – The term covers the “casual employees” employed for a few days on a work of perennial nature – Wages as defined in section 2(22) and wage period as defined in section 2(23) not excluding the wages payable to casual workers – The casual workers cannot be deprived of the beneficial provisions of the Act. (Para 5, 6, 7, 8)
AIR 1986 SC 1686 – Relied upon
(1974) 2 Lab. Law Journal 530 (Mad.) – Referred
(1994) Supp. 3 SCC 567 – Distinguished
(c) Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 – Section 2(2A) – Contribution period – Not exceeding six consecutive months – No minimum period prescribed – Employee working form lesser period cannot be deprived of the benefits. (Para 9)
(d) Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 – Section 39(5) – Turf club covered by the Act since 1968 – Other departments also covered by notification of 1978 – Club liable to pay contribution since 1978. (Para 14)
(2004) 6 SCC 191 – Distinguished
Facts of the case:
The questions involved for decision in these appeals are whether casual workers are covered under definition of employee as defined in Section 2(9) of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 and pertaining to period for which Turf Club is liable to pay from 1978-79 or from 1987.
Result: Appeals preferred by ESI Corporation allowed and those preferred by Turf Club dismissed with costs.
JUDGMENT :
Arun Mishra, J.
1. The questions involved for decision in these appeals are whether casual workers are covered under definition of employee as defined in Section 2(9) of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as ‘ESI Act’) and pertaining to period for which Turf Club is liable to pay from 1978-79 or from 1987.
2. The main question involved in the present appeals whether the ESI Act is applicable to Royal Western India Turf Club Ltd. has been concluded by a 3-Judge Bench decision of this Court vide judgment dated 31.7.2014. It has been held that the Turf Club would fall within the meaning of the word ‘shop’ as mentioned in the notification issued under the ESI Act. Therefore, the provisions of ESI Act would extend to the appellant also. Thereafter the matters have been placed before a Division Bench to consider other questions on merit.
3. It was submitted on behalf of Royal Western India Turf Club Ltd. that temporary staff engaged on race-days for issue of tickets, would not be covered by the definition of the “employee” under Section 2(9) of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948. It was also submitted that in view of the consent terms filed in Application No.16/1976 by the Turf Club before the ESI Court, Bombay, the casual labour engaged on race track were not to be covered under the ESI Act. It was further submitted that in view of Rule 2A of the Employees’ State Insurance (Central) Rules, 1950, contribution is required to be made for a period as may be prescribed in the Regulations and in view of Regulations 29 and 31 of the Employees’ State Insurance (General) Regulations, 1950, it would be difficult to calculate the contribution for the employees who work casually on the racing days. It was also submitted that the direction issued by the High Court not to recover the amount before 1987 does not call for any interference in the appeal filed by ESI Corporation, for which reliance has been placed on a decision of this Court in Employees State Insurance Corporation v. Hyderabad Race Club (2004) 6 SCC 191.
4. Whereas it was contended on behalf of the ESI Corporation that in view of the specific notification dated 18.9.1978 so far as Royal Western India Turf Club Ltd. is concerned in Maharashtra, position was clear as to applicability of ESI Act. The consent terms which have been relied upon related to the earlier period in which other establishments of the Turf Club were covered. In the notification issued on 18.9.1978, the departments in question of the Turf Club were also covered. Even the consent term reflects that there was no doubt that the Turf Club was covered under provisions of the ESI Act w.e.f. 1968.
5. First we take up the question whether casual employees are covered within the purview of ESI Act. Section 2(9) defines “employee”, the provision is extracted hereunder :
“2(9) “employee” means any person employed for wages in or in connection with the work of a factory or establishment to which this Act applies and —
(i) who is directly employed by the principal employer, on any work of, or incidental or preliminary to or connected with the work of, the factory or establishment, whether such work is done by the employee in the factory or establishment or elsewhere; or
(ii) who is employed by or through an immediate employer, on the premises of the factory or establishment or under the supervision of the principal employer or his agent on work which is ordinarily part of the work of the factory or establishment or which is preliminary to the work carried on in or incidental to the purpose of the factory or establishment; or
(iii) whose services are temporarily lent or let on hire to the principal employer by the person with whom the person whose services are so lent or let on hire has entered into a contract of service; and includes any person employed for wages on any work connected with the administration of the factory or establishment or any part, department or branch thereof or with t
