J. Nisha Banu, J.

1. This appeal is preferred against the order dated 22.08.2011 in ESIOP.No.9/2008 passed by the learned Judge, ESI Court, Madurai. The impugned order sets aside the letter dated 19.07.2001 of the SRO, ESI Corporation, Madurai, and remits back the Order dated 16.03.2007 of SRO, ESIC, Madurai with a direction to the Corporation to consider the matter afresh after issue of a fresh notice to the petitioner/1st respondent herein for filing representation and documents if any and directed the 1st respondent herein/petitioner company to appear before them on 15.09.2011. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants preferred the present appeal.

2. The petitioner in ESIOP No 9/2008 had prayed for setting aside the letter dated 19.07.2001 and the Order dated 16.03.2007 as illegal and arbitrary and to declare that the petitioner are not liable to pay the ESI contribution from 01.08.2001. The letter dated 19.07.2001 communicates the notification dated 20.06.2001 declaring the area to be covered under the ESI Act, 1948 and requesting/directing compliances by the respondent factory. The order dated 16.03.2007 of ESIC pertains to some representations made by the 1st respondent regarding the alleged inadequacy in the medical facilities extended to the area under the Act.

3. Perused the records. Heard the counsels for all parties. The essence of the litigation before the ESI Court is seeking exemption from payment of ESI contributions on the ground that the notification came to be issued even before the effective implementation of the ESI hospital, which they seek to prove. It was emphasized on behalf of the 1st respondent that though the notification was issued, it was not effectively implemented and therefore their workers had not used the medical facility of ESI hospital and therefore they are not obligated to pay the contributions under the Act. I do not see merits in the arguments of the 1st respondent. The arguments are not tenable for the following reasons.

4. The ESI Act, 1948 is a welfare legislation. It is a statutory insurance scheme for the health and welfare of a specific class of workers and their families in the event of sickness, maternity, employment injury etc., of the employees that cast certain obligations on the employers. The Act empowers the Government to issue notifications to appoint dates for enforcement of the Act with respect to any area. The Act envisages creation of medical facilities besides insurance protection of employees against certain contingencies. The Act mandates the employers covered under the ESI Act, 1948 to pay the contribution under the scheme to the corporation periodically at specified rates and obligates them to file periodical returns and provides machinery provisions to ensure that the Act is complied with by the employers and the contributions paid in time. Therefore, the obligation cast on the employers to pay contribution to the account of ESIC is mandatory and not optional participation.

5. Therefore, there is no doubt that once the area is notified under the relevant provisions of the Act, and when the employer is covered under the provisions of the Act, statutory obligation is cast on the employer to pay contributions in the manner provided under the Act and the regulations made thereunder. It is not open for the employer to plead waiver from participation or exemption from payment of contributions on any ground. Once the area is notified and the company is covered, they are liable to pay the ESI contributions to the Corporation. Needless to say, the rights of the employees or for that matter the Union of employees under the ESI Act, 1948 accrue within the framework of the Act and not outside. Therefore, the grievances of the employees or their union are no ground for the employer to abstain and default.

6. More pertinently, the legality of similar letters dated 19.07.2001 challenged in the ESIOP.No.09/2008 was upheld and affirmed by this Hon'ble Court by order dated