Case Law Details
U.P. Cooperative Federation Ltd. Vs Emoployees State Insurance Corporation (Allahabad High Court)
In the present case, the demand was raised for an amount of Rs.33,846/- for the employer’s contribution for the employees working in the account section of PCF Press for the period January 1981 to September 1986 and from January 1988 to May 1989. Thus, the demand pertain to the period prior to 20.10.1989 when the definition of ‘manufacturing process’ under section 2(14-AA) was inserted under the ESI Act. In view of the amended Act No.29 of 1989 being prospective in nature, the definition of word ‘manufacturing process’ would not be the same as expansively assigned under the ‘Factories Act’ and would be governed by the normal defination of ‘manufacturing process’. Word ‘manufacturing process’ has been expansively defined under the Factories Act even to include Printing Press activity as a manufacturing process where as in common parlance Printing Press cannot be termed as a ‘manufacturing process’. In view of the same, the applicability of the provisions of ‘ESI Act’ on the petitioner would clearly not be covered by Section 1(4) of the ‘ESI Act’ for the period prior to 21.10.1989 and thus, the demand cannot be justified.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Heard Sri Shireesh Kumar, Advocate assisted by Sri Mustafa
Khan, the counsel for the petitioner and Sri Shishir Pradhan, the counsel for the respondents.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
