Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query!
Scanned Judgements…!
In the complex landscape of Indian labour laws, one persistent question for employers and employees alike is: Whether ESIC contribution and labour welfare will be treated in respect of the definition of wages. Is it included or not in the definition of wage under the Wage code? With the introduction of the Code on Wages, 2019, there's growing uncertainty about how contributions to the Employees' State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) and labour welfare funds align with the new definition of wages.
This blog post dives deep into the definitions, judicial interpretations, and practical implications. While this analysis draws from key judgments and statutory provisions, it's for informational purposes only and not specific legal advice. Consult a labour law expert for your situation.
Section 2(y) of the Code on Wages, 2019, defines wages comprehensively, including all remuneration payable to an employee for work performed. Notably, it includes an Explanation deeming the value of in-kind remuneration (not exceeding 15% of total wages) as part of wages. This provision came into focus after repealing earlier laws like the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, Minimum Wages Act, 1948, and Payment of Bonus Act, 1965, effective from August 8, 2019. Indian Tea Association VS State of Assam - 2020 0 Supreme(Gau) 759
However, the Code does not explicitly address ESIC contributions or labour welfare funds. ESIC contributions typically involve employer and employee shares under the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (Section 2(22)), which defines wages as remuneration up to ₹21,000 per month, excluding certain items like overtime beyond a threshold or house rent allowance. Labour welfare funds, often under state-specific Labour Welfare Acts, are employer contributions for employee welfare.
The key debate: Are these employer contributions (ESIC employer share, welfare cess) part of the wages payable to the employee, or are they excluded as statutory deductions or benefits?
Courts have long emphasized that wage definitions are act-specific and not interchangeable. The ESIC Act's Section 2(22) remains operative, as the Code on Wages repeals only select statutes and spares social security laws like ESIC. No direct harmonization exists between Section 2(y) of the Code and ESIC's provisions. Indian Tea Association VS State of Assam - 2020 0 Supreme(Gau) 759
In practice, employer contributions to ESIC or welfare funds are not considered wages under most definitions, as they are not direct remuneration to the employee but statutory obligations. For instance, the value of subsidized food concessions has been excluded from provident fund contributions, as it doesn't form part of dearness allowance or monetary obligations: cash facilities cannot be said to be forming part of dearness allowance or past of any monetary obligation or obligation in any manner to be discharged by the employer in favour of the employee. DEEPAK NITRITE LTD, 4/12, GIDC CHEMICAL COMPLEX VS REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER - 2012 Supreme(Guj) 513
Indian judiciary consistently rejects uniform wage definitions across acts. Here are pivotal insights:
These cases underscore that inclusions/exclusions (e.g., food concessions, bonuses) depend on the statute's text, resisting blanket application to ESIC or welfare contributions.
No judgments or circulars in reviewed materials directly harmonize ESIC's wage definition with Code Section 2(y). The respondent in one case argued for including in-kind benefits (like food grains) under the Code's Explanation prospectively, but courts prioritized act-specific rules. Indian Tea Association VS State of Assam - 2020 0 Supreme(Gau) 759
For compliance, employers should use ESIC's definition for contributions, separate from Code computations for minimum wages or bonus.
Await ESIC or Labour Ministry circulars for clarity on welfare funds.
Stay compliant by tracking amendments. For tailored advice, reach out to labour law professionals.
This post is based on analyzed judgments and statutes as of latest available data. Laws evolve—verify current status.
#ESICWages #CodeOnWages #LabourLawIndia
The question that arose for consideration in that case is whether the contribution for leave encashment expenditure is covered within the definition of basic wages. Here, 20% of the wages itself is given as interim relief. ... That was also a case in which the question was regarding the adhoc allowances and whether such an allowance can be treated as forming a part of the character of basic wages. There may not be any dispute on tha....
Dearness allowance which is an exception in the definition of “basic wages”, is included for the propose of contribution by S.6 and the real exceptions therefore in clause (ii) are the other exceptions beside dearness allowance, which has been included through S.6.” ... There in some of the cases the management was paying basic wage + variable dearness allowance + travel allowance + lunch incentive. This was not included in the “basic wages....
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said case held that production bonus was not to be included in basic wage for purpose of calculating provident fund contribution. ... (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court was considering a case whether production of bonus is included as basic wages as defined Section 2(b) of the PF Act. ... The questions that arise for consideration are: i) Whether the Petitioner-Company is liable to pay P.F. contribution#HL_....
The question as to whether the conveyance allowance falls under the definition of wages or not has been decided by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Asian Paints (India) Ltd., Patancheru, Medak District v. ... ESIC on payment of contribution on conveyance allowance. The SRO Coimbatore had issued a demand to the employer for payment of contributions on conveyance allowance paid to the employees. ... It is also brought to the notice of this Court that communication was addressed b....
Single Bench dealt with an identical issue of whether under the ESI Act, minimum wage has to be adopted or not. Although not binding, we agree with the finding of the Karnataka High Court that adopting the rigours of the Minimum Wage Act, 1948 would be contrary to the provisions of the ESI Act. ... insurance mechanism and not an extension of wage obligations. ... Single judge and upheld the Award of the Labour Court but did not inte....
Section 40 of the Act casts liability on the Principal Employer to pay the contribution to the Corporation, whether it is of employer s or of employee s contribution. Of course the Principal Employer is allowed to recover that part of "employer s contribution" by making deduction from his wages. ... It reads thus: ... "wage period" in relation to an employee means the period in respect of which wages are ordinarily payable to him whether#HL....
The difficulty, however, arises because the definition also provides that certain things will not be included in the term "basic wages", and these are contained in three clauses. ... Dearness allowance which is an exception in the definition of "basic wages", is included for the propose of contribution by s. 6 and the real exceptions therefore in clause (ii) are the other exceptions beside dearness allowance, which has been included....
Sub-Section (2) of Section 42 again provides that contribution of the employer as well as the employee shall be payable by the principal employer for the wage period in respect of the whole or part of which wages are payable to the employee and not otherwise. ... Section 39 deals with the contribution payable under the Act with respect to the employee in respect of each "wage period" shall ordinarily fall due on the last day of the ....
Sub- section (2) of section 42 again provides that contribution of the employer as well as the employee shall be payable by the principal employer for the wage period in respect of the whole or part of which wages are payable to the employee and not otherwise. ... Section 39 deals with the contribution payable under the Act with respect to the employee in respect of each “wage period” shall ordinarily fall due on the last day of the....
Sub-section (2) of section 42 again provides that contribution of the employer as well as the employee shall be payable by the principal employer for the wage period in respect of the whole or part of which wages are payable to the employee and not otherwise. ... and wages as defined in section 2(22) and wage period as defined in section 2(23) does not exclude the wages payable to casual workers. ... Section 39 deals with the #HL_ST....
Overtime wages are included in the definition of wages under the Payment of Wages Act, and the Appellate Court erred in denying the claim based on contract absence and wage ceiling. 1. Heard the parties. 2. A brief background leading to this civil revision under Section 115 C.P.C. is that the petitioners jointly moved an application before the “Authority” on 15.07.1999 under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (the Act) claiming wages for overtime work done by them in view of the provisions under Section 15(2) read with 16 of the said Act. The said petition was registered as P....
The statute having defined the term -basic wage- which for the purposes of the Act could not be less than the minimum wage, there was no compulsion to hold that the definition of -basic wage- should be equated to the definition of -minimum wage- under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948.
When once the Wage Board has given the definition of a Calligraphist and included persons coming under that category in the definition of a “working journalist” the only test to be applied will be whether the person concerned satisfied the requirements of the definition given by the Wage Board. Once the jurisdiction of the Wage Board is conceded, the approach to be made is only to find out whether a person, who claims to be a Calligraphist satisfies the definition as given by the Wage Board. It needs no explanation to say that the above reading will not be a very happy one.....
In the context of the plea of wages being price for labour, it was opined that it was not possible to accept the contention of the workmen that whatever is price for labour and arises out of contract is included in the definition of “basic wages” and therefore production bonus, which is a kind of incentive wage, would be included.
But the main part of the definition is subject to exceptions in cl. (ii), and these exceptions clearly show that they include even the price for labour. It is, therefore, not possible to accept the contention on behalf of the respondents that whatever is price for labour and arises out of contract is included in the definition of "basic wages" and therefore production bonus which is a kind of incentive wage would be included. This court had occasion to consider production bonus 1959 Supp (2) SCR 1012.
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
