Directors of a company can be deemed to be occupiers of a factory within the meaning of Section 2 (17) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, and it is not necessary to specifically plead in the petition of complaint that the director was in actual physical possession of the contribution cards.

( 1 ) THE petitioners are directors of Messrs. P. Sett and Co. Private Ltd. having its registered office and factory at No. 3, Rama-kanta Sen Lane, within police station Manicktola, in the city of Calcutta.

( 2 ) ON June 5, 1976, the opposite party No. 1, Satyesh Chandra Bagchi, an Insurance Inspector under the Employees' State Insurance Corporation, Calcutta, filed a petition of complaint against the two petitioners and another in the court of the Judicial Magistrate at Sealdah alleging commission of offences under Section 85 (a) and (g) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter the Act), read with Section 4 (i) (b) of the Employees' State Insurance (Amendment) Act, 1975, for violation of Regulation 26 (c) of the Employees' State Insurance (General) Regulations, 1950 (hereinafter the Regulations), for failure to submit the necessary contribution cards for the periods expiring on November 11, 1975, and January 31, 1976, within the statutory period.

( 3 ) THE learned Magistrate, on the basis of the aforesaid petition of complaint, took cognizance and issued summons against the two petitioners and another under Section 85 (a) and (g) of the Act. In this application, the petitioners have prayed that the proceeding pending' against them in the court of the learned Magistrate, being Case No. C-816 of 1976, be quashed.

( 4 ) MR. D. K. Dutta, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners, has drawn our attention to paragraph 2 of the petition of complaint filed by the opposite party wherein it has been stated, inter alia, that the accused persons are the directors of Messrs. P. Sett and Co. Private Ltd. and, as such, they are the principal employers, as defined in Section 2 (17) of the Act. Mr. Dutta's contention is that the petitioners as directors cannot be deemed to be either owners or occupiers of the factory within the meaning of Section 2 (17) of the Act. According to Mr. Dutta, under the said definition, in the case of a company, the company or, if a managing agent has been appointed, the managing agent, or if a manager has been named, the manager, is the owner or occupier of the factory.

( 5 ) MR. Dutta's alternative argument is that even if we hold that a director of a factory is the principal employer, it has nevertheless to be specifically stated in the

petition of complaint in order to make a director liable for violation of paragraph 26 (c) of the Regulations, that he was in actual physical possession of the contribution cards in respect of which there has been a default.

( 6 ) MR. Debesh Chandra Mukherji, appearing on behalf of the opposite party No. 1, has submitted that in the case of a company whether it be a public limited company or a private limited company, even a shareholder shall be deemed to be the owner or occupier of the factory within the meaning of Section 2 (17) of the Act. Mr. Mukherji has also relied on a decision of a Single Bench of this court in the case of B. M. Chatteyji v. State oj West Bengal , wherein it was held that a director of a limited company was the owner within the meaning of Section 2{17) of the Act and if there were several persons in the position of directors, all of them would be liable for contravention of the provisions of the Act and the Regulations.

( 7 ) MR. Biren Mitra, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the State, has to some extent, supported Mr. Dutta and has submitted that a director qua director is not the owner or occupier within the meaning of Section 2 (17) of the Act, but the company is the owner or occupier.

( 8 ) SECTION 2 (17) of the Act defines " Principal employer " in the following terms:" (i) in a factory, the owner or occupier of the factory and includes the managing agent of such owner or occupier, the legal representative of a deceased owner or occupier, and where a person has been named as the manager of the factory under the Factories Act, 1948 (63 of 1948), the person so named; (ii) in any