High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeal in ESI Act Case — Employer Not Liable for Contribution on Wages Paid During Strike Period. Security services company successfully challenges ESI Corporation's demand for contribution on wages paid to employees during a strike, as such wages are not 'remuneration' under Section 2(22) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU In Favour of Accused
  • 42
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, M/s Group 4 Securitas Guarding Limited (now G4S Security Secure Solutions India (P) Ltd), is a security services company covered under the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948. The appellant employed security guards and paid wages during a strike period. The ESI Corporation determined a contribution of Rs.65,20,855.18, which the appellant challenged by filing an application under Section 75 of the Act before the ESI Court, Bengaluru. The ESI Court dismissed the application, leading to this appeal under Section 82(2) of the Act. The core legal issue was whether wages paid during a strike constitute 'remuneration' under Section 2(22) of the ESI Act, which defines remuneration to include all remuneration paid or payable in cash to an employee, but excludes payments for periods of authorized leave, lock-out, strike, or cessation of work not due to the employee's fault. The appellant argued that strike period wages are excluded, while the respondent contended they are covered. The High Court analyzed the definition and held that wages paid during a strike are not remuneration as the strike is a period of no work, and the exclusion in Section 2(22) applies. The court allowed the appeal, set aside the ESI Court's order, and declared that the appellant is not liable to pay the contribution demanded.

Headnote

A) Employees' State Insurance - Remuneration - Strike Period Wages - Section 2(22) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 - The issue was whether wages paid to employees during a strike period are 'remuneration' under the Act. The court held that such wages are not remuneration as they are paid for a period when no work is performed, and thus no contribution is payable. The ESI Court's dismissal of the application was set aside. (Paras 1-10)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the wages paid by the appellant to its employees during the period of strike constitute 'remuneration' under Section 2(22) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, thereby attracting liability to pay ESI contribution.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal allowed. The order dated 02.08.2013 passed by the ESI Court, Bengaluru in ESI Application No.19/2002 is set aside. The appellant is declared not liable to pay the contribution of Rs.65,20,855.18.

Law Points

  • Wages paid during strike period not remuneration under ESI Act
  • Section 2(22) of ESI Act excludes payments for periods of no work
  • ESI Court erred in dismissing application
  • Employer not liable for contribution on strike period wages
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2023 LawText (KAR) (11) 24

M.F.A.No.7749/2013 (ESI)

2023-11-21

K.S.Mudagal, Ramachandra D. Huddar

Sri J.Pradeep Kumar (for appellant), Sri M.N.Kumar (for respondents)

M/s Group 4 Securitas Guarding Limited (now M/s G4S Security Secure Solutions India (P) Ltd)

The Regional Director, ESI Corporation, and Recovery Officer, ESI Corporation

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against dismissal of application under Section 75 of ESI Act challenging contribution demand.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought declaration that it is not liable to pay contribution of Rs.65,20,855.18 determined by respondent No.1.

Filing Reason

Appellant challenged the ESI Corporation's demand for contribution on wages paid during strike period.

Previous Decisions

ESI Court dismissed the application in ESI Application No.19/2002 on 02.08.2013.

Issues

Whether wages paid during strike period constitute 'remuneration' under Section 2(22) of the ESI Act, 1948.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that strike period wages are excluded from remuneration under Section 2(22). Respondent argued that such wages are covered and contribution is payable.

Ratio Decidendi

Wages paid to employees during a strike period are not 'remuneration' under Section 2(22) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, as the strike is a period of cessation of work not due to the employee's fault, and the definition excludes payments for such periods. Therefore, no ESI contribution is payable on such wages.

Judgment Excerpts

Challenging the dismissal of it’s application under Section 75 of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948... The brief facts of the case are as follows:

Procedural History

Appellant filed ESI Application No.19/2002 under Section 75 of the ESI Act before the ESI Court, Bengaluru, challenging the contribution demand. The ESI Court dismissed the application on 02.08.2013. The appellant then filed this appeal under Section 82(2) of the Act before the High Court of Karnataka.

Acts & Sections

  • Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948: 2(22), 75, 82(2)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Upholds Dismissal of Bus Conductor in MSRTC Misconduct Case — Labour Court Findings of Valid Enquiry and Proportionality of Punishment Upheld. Domestic Enquiry Found Fair and Proper; Dismissal for Issuing Tickets for Shorter Dista...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeal in ESI Act Case — Employer Not Liable for Contribution on Wages Paid During Strike Period. Security services company successfully challenges ESI Corporation's demand for contribution on wages paid to employees ...