Miscellaneous Appeal No. 304 of 2007. Case: Employees State Insurance Corporation through its Regional Director and Employees State Insurance Corporation Vs Uma Shankar Bajaj, Son of Sri S.R. Bajaj, Proprietor Gokul Mini Restaurant. High Court of Patna (India)
| Case Number | Miscellaneous Appeal No. 304 of 2007 |
| Judges | Rakesh Kumar, J. |
| Issue | Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 - Sections 2(12), 45(2), 45A and 82; Insurance Act - Section 75 |
| Judgement Date | July 11, 2011 |
| Court | High Court of Patna (India) |
Judgment:
Rakesh Kumar, J.
-
Heard Sri Sudhir Kumar Bijpuria, learned Counsel for the Appellant. None appeared on behalf of Respondent.
-
The present memo of appeal has been preferred under Section 82 of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the 'E.S.I. Act') against the decision dated 18th April, 2007 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court & Employees State Insurance Court, Patna (hereinafter referred to as the 'Insurance Court') in E.S.I. Case No. 5 of 1998. By the said order the Insurance Court has set aside the demand of contribution made by the Appellant.
-
Short fact of the case is that on 28.01.1998 a notice was issued under the signature of Deputy Director, Employees' State Insurance Corporation to the Respondent/owner-cum-proprietor of M/s Gokul Mini Restaurant, situated at Patna under the provisions of the E.S.I. Act for furnishing declaration, statement of contribution, deposit of contribution and to take steps to get the employees registered under the E.S.I. Act.
-
Aggrieved with the notice dated 28.01.1998 the Respondent filed an application under Section 75(i)(g) of the Insurance Act which was registered as E.S.I. Case No. 5 of 1998 with a prayer to adjudicate as to whether the coverage of the Respondent's restaurant under the scheme and provisions of the 'E.S.I. Act' was justified or not. As per notice demanding contribution, Respondent's restaurant was covered with effect from 01.04.1996 under Section 2(12) of the 'E.S.I. Act'. The Respondent/restaurant was also directed to submit declaration form, statement of contributions, payment of contributions and for taking compliance of the other requirements.
-
Before the Insurance Court the Appellants appeared and filed its show cause detailing therein that on 19.12.1997 and 23.12.1997 a survey and an inspection was conducted. A survey was conducted in the restaurant by an Insurance Inspector under the provisions of Section 45(2) of the 'E.S.I. Act' for assessing applicability and coverage of the restaurant. In survey, it was noticed, that from the period April 1996 to November 1997, 14 employees in each month were employed in the restaurant. The restaurant in question was functioning in two parts i.e. lower portion and upper portion. The workshop of the restaurant was found functioning in upper portion where electrical energy and Liquified Petroleum Gas (hereinafter referred as 'L.P.G.') was being used for preparation of sweets and food...
To continue reading
Request your trial