EMPLOYEE'S STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION versus M/S. F. FIBRE BANGALORE (P) LTD.

Citation: [1996] SUPP. 8 S.C.R. 609 · Decided: 07-11-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, G.B. PATTANAIK · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

EMPLOYEE'S STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION 
A 
v. 
M/S. F. FIBRE BANGALORE (P) LTD. 
NOVEMBER 7, 1996 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND G.B. PATTANAlK, JJ.] 
Labour Law 
Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 : 
S. 75-Determination of contribution-Dispute regarding-
Adjudication by Employees Insurance Court-Held, though s. 75 does not 
envisage as to who has to approach the Insurance Court, by necessary 
implication, when the employer denies the liability or the applicability of 
the provisions of the Act or the quantum of the contribution to be deposited 
B 
c 
by him, it is for the employer and not for the Corporation, to approach the D 
Insurance Court and seek adjudication-The Full Bench of the High Court 
erred in holding that in all cases (except in a case where the order u!s 45-
A becomes final) the Corporation .is required to go to the Insurance Court, 
have the matter adjudicate and then make a demand-This view of the 
Full Bench of the High Court is set aside. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2733 of 
1980. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 20.2.79 of the Kamataka High 
E 
Court in M.F.A. No.147 of 1974. 
p 
R. Venugopal Reddy, S.A. Wasim Qadri and Mrs. Anil Katiyar for 
the Appellant. 
M.N. Shroff for the Respondent. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
This appeal by spec<al leave arises from the judgment dated 20.2.1979 
G 
of the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court which in turn had 
followed the ratio of judgment of the Full Bench in M.F.A.No.147/74, H 
609 
610 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 8 S.C.R. 
A dated 19.4.1978. The Full Bench had held as under: 
B 
c 
D 
"In the result, we answer the question referred to us as follows: 
Where, in cases to which provisions of Section 45A 
of the 'Act' are attracted, the Corporation by an order made 
in accordance with that section determines the amount of 
contributions payable and that claim is disputed by the 
employer, it would not be necessary for the Corporation to 
seek a resolution of that dispute before the Insurance Court. 
Such a claim is recoverable as arrears of land revenue. Ifthe 
employer disputes the claim it is for him to move the Insurance 
Court for relief. In other cases-other than cases where 
determination of the amount of contributions under Section 
45A is made the Corporation, if its claim is disputed by the 
employer, should seek an adjudication of the dispute before 
the Insurance Court, before enforcing recovery." 
The question that arises for consideration is : whether the view taken 
by the Full Bench of the High Court is correct in law? Section 1(4) of the 
Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short, 'the Act') envisages that 
the Act shall apply, in the first instance, to all factories (including factories 
belonging to the Government) other than seasonal factories, Section I (5) 
E gives power to the appropriate Government after consultation with the 
Corporation, to notify in the official Gazette extending the provisions of 
the Act to any of other establishments or class of establishments, industrial, 
commercial, agricultural or otherwise. Section 1(6) envisages that a factory 
or an establishment to which this Act applies shall continue to be governed 
by the provisions of the Act notwithstanding that a number of persons 
F employed therein at any time falls below the limit specified by or under 
the Act or the manufacturing process therein ceases to be carried on with 
the aid of power. After its application under Chapter IV, all employees in 
factories, or establishments to which the Act applies, shall be insured in 
the manner provided by this Act. Under Section 39(1), the contribution 
G payable under the Act in resect of an employee, shall comprise contribution 
payable by the employer and contribution payable by the employee shall 
be paid to the Corporation; the manner and details of payment and interest 
for the delay in payment and the rate of interest and the procedure for 
recovery are not material for the purpose of this case. Hence, they are 
omitted, Section 40 envisages that the principal employer is enjoined to 
H pay contribution is respect of every employee in the first instance whether 
EMPLOYEES' STATE INSURANCE CORPN. '· F FIBRE BANGALORE (P) LTD. 611 
he is employed directly by him or through an immediate employer, both A 
the employer's and the employees' contribution. Sub-section (2) thereof 
provides, with a non obstnate clause, that subject to the provisions of the 
Act an
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.