Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
M.A.Abdul Hakhim
Regional Director, ESI Corporation – Appellant
Versus
L & T Tech Park Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M.A.Abdul Hakhim, J.
1. Appellants are the Respondents Nos.1 and 2 before the E.I. Court, Alappuzha in I.C. No.67/2011 filed under Sections 75 and 77 of the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 (E.S.I. Act, for short). They are the Regional Director and the Deputy Director of E.S.I. Corporation. The Respondents are the Applicant and the Respondent No.3 before the E.I. Court. The Appellants are challenging the Order by which the refund of the ESI contribution was ordered by the E.I. Court.
2. This Court formulated the following substantial question of law in this Appeal as per the Order dated 20.11.2024:
“Whether Section 2 (9) of the E.S.I. Act covers the workers engaged for pre-operative fit-out works by the employer requiring contribution to be paid as per the aforesaid Act?”
3. The parties are referred to according to their status before the E.I. Court.
4. The Corporate office of the Respondent No.3 at Mumbai was an establishment covered under the ESI Act during the relevant period. The Applicant was not an establishment covered under the ESI Act. The Applicant owns a building by the name, Thejomaya, constructed for I.T. business, I.T. enabled services and other related serv
Pre-operative fit-out workers are not considered employees under the E.S.I. Act as they do not qualify for coverage based on the establishment's operational timeline, rendering the request for ESI co....
The court ruled that workers engaged in pre-operative fit-out works are not covered employees under the ESI Act and ordered a refund of contributions based on prior incorrect payments.
Cooperation with authorities and production of genuine documents are essential in disputing establishment coverage under the E.S.I. Act.
The functional integrality of the establishments justified their clubbing and coverage under the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the evidence provided by authenticated documents and wage registers to determine the coverage of an establishment under the E....
Cold storage facilities are classified as 'factories' under the Employees State Insurance Act, as they involve a manufacturing process, necessitating ESI contributions regardless of the number of emp....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the joint and several liability of the transferee and the transferrer under Section 93A of the Employees State Insurance Act.
The court established that the presence of more than 10 employees, including Hamals, qualifies the establishment under the applicability of the Employees' State Insurance Act.
Self-employed individuals cannot be registered as employees under the Employees' State Insurance Act, necessitating a genuine employer-employee relationship for eligibility.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
