Honble BALIA, J.–Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2). This appeal is directed against the order passed by Single Judge dated 10.9.2001 in S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 154/2001 and S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 155/2001, which arose under Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 in respect of an order passed by E.S.I. Court on an application made by the Board.

(3). In these two appeals, by notification dated 14.03.1985 issued by the Central Government the provisions of Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter called `the E.S.I. Act), has been extended to Hanumangarh Junction and Hanumangarh Town. As a result of the said notification E.S.I. Scheme became applicable and operative in the aforesaid areas w.e.f. 16.3.85.

(4). After the extension of the provisions of the Act to the area of Hanumangarh Town and Hanumangarh Junction, the Inspector of the E.S.I. Corporation, inspected the premises of the Assistant Engineer R.S.E.B. (O & M), Hanumangarh Town, in the presence of Shri Gurjeet Singh Arora, the then Assistant Engineer. After the inspection a notice was given to the appellant on 19.08.1985 to file the return in accordance with the performa, which was attached with the notice and was also asked to get the employees of the Board registered under E.S.I. Act.

(5). A second notice dated 29.08.1985 was again issued to the Board by which the appellant was informed regarding the determination of the employees contribution for the period from March 16, 1985 to June 30, 1986 amounting to Rs. 1,63,338.30 on ad hoc basis and the Board was asked to show-cause why the ad hoc assessment made may not be finalized for which 10.09.1986 was fixed for the hearing. On that date no reply was filed nor anybody was appeared on behalf of the Board. The Corporation `thereafter sent a certificate for the recovery of the said amount to the competent officer to be recovered as arrears of rent revenue.

(6). It appears from the material referred in the order of the E.S.I. Court that a writ petition has been filed in 1987 about the applicability of the Act to the Board. We have been referred to a Bench decision of this Court passed in Rajasthan State Electricity Board vs. Director General Employees State Insurance Corporation (1), which was decided on 27.04.1988. This writ petition was primarily concerned with increase in the remuneration limit for the purpose of increasing the operative field of E.S.I. Scheme and bring more employees within the ambit of E.S.i. Scheme, the workmen who were drawing the remuneration up to Rs. 1600/- per month instead upto Rs. 1000/- only as prior to 27th January 1985 were brought within the purview of benefit of E.S.I. when amendment was made in E.S.I. Act, 1948.

(7). In pursuance of aforesaid amendment when a demand was raised for contribution in the first instance, the writ petitions were filed in this Court by employees challenging their coverage and certain stay orders were passed as a result of which no amounts were made as employees contribution for the period from February, 1985 to September, 1985. Ultimately one of the said writ petition filed by the petitioner was withdrawn and in another writ petition interim order was vacated.

(8). Before the Division Bench, hearing the aforesaid writ petition the applicability of the Act and the extension of its provisions to the employees of the Board was not disputed. It was stated by the Division Bench that it is not disputed, that even the employees of the petitioner were so covered. In the writ petition No. 1249 of 1987, the Board has primarily denied its liability to contribute the employers share to the Corporation which it has not deducted under the order of this Court. This contention was repelled when the Court said that petitioner is bound to make payment of the employers as well as employees contribution to the respondents. This liability extends whether or not he has cared to deduct the employees contribution from the wages or not.

(9). Apart from this litigation, th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document