( 1 ) THIS Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section 82 (2) of the Employees' State insurance Act, 1948 directed against order dated December 21, 2000 passed in ESI application No. 69/1999 on the file of the EI court (Addl. Industrial Tribunal) at Bangalore.

( 2 ) FOR the purpose of convenience and better understanding, the appellant and the respondent are hereinafter referred to as the applicant and respondent-ESI Corporation as arrayed in the Court below.

( 3 ) THE brief facts of the case leading to the filing of the appeal may be stated as under:that the applicant filed an application under Section 75 of the Employees' State insurance (ESI) Act, 1948 against the respondent- ESI Corporation before the EI Court at Bangalore praying for the following reliefs: (a) to set aside the claim in C-18 dated nil at Document No. 7 to the application. (b) to order that the amount paid towards books and periodicals under the broad head of Modular Expenses 'wages' as defined under Section 2 (22) of the Act, and (c) to order any other appropriate relief/reliefs that the Court deems appropriate in the matter in the interest of justice and equity.

( 4 ) THE application filed under Section 75 of the ESI Act was registered as ESI Application no. 69/1999 on the file of EI Court. The case of the applicant as averred in the application is that conveyance wages paid in terms of the contract of employment to its employees forms part and parcel of wages as defined in Section 2 (22) of the act. On the other hand, ESI Corporation entered appearance in the abovesaid case and filed its statement of objections contending that the contention of the applicant that the Modular expenses viz. , conveyance, travelling allowance, allowance for books and periodicals except HRA are wages is not correct and therefore prayed for dismissal of the application.

( 5 ) THUS, the bone of contention of the applicant before the Court below was that the conveyance allowance do constitute wages.

( 6 ) IN view of the pleadings on record, the court below framed the following issues: (I) Whether the applicant proves that the modular expenses paid to its employees in the form of conveyance allowance, leave travel allowance are not (sic) wages and therefore the applicant is not liable to pay contribution on the wages paid to its employees including modular expenses. (II) Whether the applicant further proves that the notice in C-18 Dt. Nil is not sustainable and liable to be set aside. (III) What order?

( 7 ) IN support of the case, it got examined its Accounts Officer as A. W-l and got marked exs. Al to A9. In rebuttal, the Superintendent of respondent-ESI Corporation got himself examined as R. W-1 and got marked Ex. R1 to r4. On the basis of the evidence and records, the learned ESI Judge came to the conclusion that travelling allowance, modular expenses paid towards books and periodicals do not form part of wages but held that the conveyance allowance paid to the employees forms part and parcel of wages. Therefore, the Court below set aside Exs-P6 and P8 and directed the ESI corporation to calculate the contribution taking into consideration the conveyance allowance and HRA paid to the employees as part of wages by excluding the amounts paid towards travelling allowance, books and periodicals. This is impugned in this Appeal.

( 8 ) THE appellant has urged the following ground in this appeal: (A) that the El Court failed to appreciate that the Modular Expenses, which comprised conveyance allowance was reimbursement per month and falls under exception Clause 2 (22) (b) of the ESI Act and therefore, it cannot be treated as part of wages for the purpose of determination of coverage of an employee under Section 2 (9) (b) of the ESI act. (B) that the Court below failed to appreciate that the so called conveyance allowance was nothing but travelling allowance as defined under Section 2 (22)0) of the ESI Act. (C) that the Court below failed to appreciate tha