SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(AP) 437

N.V.RAMANA, S.B.SINHA
Ashok Leyland Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Dy. Tahsildar/special Revenue Inspector (ESI), Recovery Cell – Respondent


S. B. SINHA, C. J.

( 1 ) IN all these writ petitions, the question as to whether the provisions of the Employees state Insurance Act, 1948 (for short the ESI act ) is applicable to the units of the petitioners or not, and whether by reason of purchase of establishments/machinery of the loanees from the A. P. State Financial corporation in the auction held by them under Section 29 of the SFC Act, the petitioners are liable to contribute amount as employers towards their share to the employees Insurance Corporation (for short the Corporation), under the ESI Act.

( 2 ) SECTION 74 of the ESI Act reads: constitution of Employees Insurance court: (1) The State Government shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute an Employees Insurance court of such local area as may be specified in the notification. (2) The Court shall consist of such number of Judges as the State government may think fit. (3) Any person who is or has been a judicial officer or is a legal practitioner of five years standing shall be qualified to be a Judge of the Employees Insurance Court. (4) The State Government may appoint the same Court for two or more local areas or two or more Courts for the







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top