Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (8) TMI 546 - SUPREME COURT

2015 (8) TMI 546 - SUPREME COURT - 2015 (6) JT 1, 2015 (7) SCALE 397, (2015) 7 SCC 690 - Jurisdiction of ESI Court - exemption under Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 - Held that:- Employees Insurance Court is a tribunal specially constituted for the purpose of deciding any controversy that may arise on the matters enumerated in Section 75 of the Act. A reading of Section 75 of the Act would show that the ESI Court has full jurisdiction to decide all the matters arising between the employer an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n (2-A) shall be decided by the ESI Court in accordance with the provisions of the Act. - ESI Court did not have the jurisdiction to consider the question of grant of exemption, order passed by the ESI Court granting exemption and consequently setting aside the demand notices is non-est. The High Court, in our view, rightly set aside the order of ESI Court and the impugned judgment does not suffer from any infirmity warranting interference. - Decided against appellant. - Civil Appeal Nos. 5138-4 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ufacture and sale of cement situated at Yerraguntla in Cuddapah District. The said area was brought under the purview of ESI Scheme with effect from 1.03.1986. The Government of Andhra Pradesh granted exemption to the appellant-cement factory from the operation of the Act by various orders for the period from 1.03.1986 to 31.03.1993. The State Government rejected appellant s application for exemption for the period from 1.04.1993 to 31.03.2001. Following rejection of claim for exemption, the Reg .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tion 74 of the Act. The appellant filed the review petition before the High Court, interalia, praying to remit the matter back to the government to rehear the representation of the appellant-company pertaining to its exemption of ESI Scheme under Section 87 of the Act for the period from 01.04.1993 to 31.03.1999 by affording personal hearing to the appellant. The review petition was dismissed observing that the appellant has an alternative remedy before the ESI Court constituted under Section 74 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

1.10.2001 those writ petitions were disposed of holding that ESI Court has jurisdiction to decide the issue and all questions including the applicability of the Act can be raised before the ESI Court. The appellant then approached the ESI Court, Hyderabad under Section 75(1)(g) of the Act challenging the demand notice. The ESI Court appointed an Advocate Commissioner to submit a report as to the medical benefits made available to the workmen in the industry. An affirmative report was filed by th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

re the High Court contending that ESI Court does not have power under Section 75 of the Act and it is only the appropriate government which has got the power under Section 87 of the Act to exempt anyone from the application of the Act. By the impugned judgment dated 21.09.2007, the High Court allowed the appeals of the Corporation holding that ESI Court does not have the power to grant exemption under Section 75(1)(g) of the Act. In these appeals, the appellant assails the correctness of the abo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

fically empowers the ESI Court to decide the matter which is in dispute between the principal employer and the Corporation in respect of any contribution or benefit or other dues payable or recoverable under the Act and thus ESI Court has been conferred wide jurisdiction under Section 75(1)(g) of the Act to adjudicate any dispute under the Act and while so, the High Court erred in observing that ESI Court has no jurisdiction. It was interalia urged that the appellant has a full-fledged hospital .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

as per Section 87 of the Act, only the appropriate government can grant exemption under the Act and under Section 75 of the Act, ESI Court has no jurisdiction to grant exemption and since ESI Court has acted beyond its jurisdiction, High Court rightly reversed the said order of ESI Court. It was contended that the jurisdiction can be conferred only in accordance with the statute and neither the order of the High Court nor the consent of the parties can confer the jurisdiction in the ESI Court. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the Act which are relevant for considering the various contentious points urged. The power to grant exemption is specifically dealt with under Section 87 of the Act. Section 87 of the Act reads as follows:- 87. Exemption of a factory or establishment or class of factories or establishments.-The appropriate Government may by notification in the Official Gazette and subject to such conditions as may be specified in the notification, exempt any factory or establishment or class of factories or .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

for a period not exceeding one year and may from time to time renew such exemption for a period not exceeding one year at a time. Under Section 89, the appropriate Government shall not grant exemption under Section 87 or Section 88 unless a reasonable opportunity has been given to the Corporation to make any representation it may wish to make in this regard. A combined reading of Sections 87, 88 and 89 would go to show that it is a two tier consideration, namely, a factory or establishment as th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

stion or dispute arises as to - (a) to (ee)……… g) any other matter which is in dispute between a principal employer and the Corporation, or between a principal employer and an immediate employer, or between a person and the Corporation or between an employee and a principal or immediate employer, in respect of any contribution or benefit or other dues payable or recoverable under this Act, or any other matter required to be or which may be decided by the Employees Insurance .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

or benefit payable or recoverable under the Act in respect of an establishment covered by it. Section 75(1)(g) of the Act does not speak of a dispute between the employer and the appropriate government which only has got the plenary power to consider the question of grant of exemption. 9. As per the scheme of the Act, the power to grant exemption is a plenary power given to an appropriate government. It follows that the ESI Court constituted under Section 74 of the Act has no jurisdiction to ta .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

relating to exemption passed by the appropriate government. 10. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant vehemently contended that grant of exemption to a factory or establishment from the operation of the Act falls within the jurisdiction of ESI Court under Section 75(1)(g) of the Act which specifically empowers the ESI Court to decide any matter which is in dispute between a principal employer and the Corporation in respect of any contribution or benefit or other dues payable or recoverable un .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Counsel for the appellant placed reliance upon the decision of this Court in Sohan Singh & Ors. vs. G.M. Ordnance Factory & Ors., (1984) Supp. SCC 661. 11. While disposing the writ petitions, of course, the High Court directed the appellant to approach the ESI Court constituted under Section 74 of the Act for the relief which the appellant had claimed in the writ petitions. Notably, both the appellant as well as the ESI Corporation did not challenge the order of the High Court but subjec .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

riate government has the power to grant exemption to a factory or establishment or class of factories or establishments from the operation of the Act. In fact, the appellant-factory itself has obtained exemption from the appropriate Government-State Government under Section 87 of the Act for the period from 1986 to 1993. Likewise, the rejection of exemption was also under Section 87 of the Act. While so, seeking the relief of declaration from the ESI Court that the appellant is entitled to exemp .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

uence. 13. The Employees Insurance Court is a tribunal specially constituted for the purpose of deciding any controversy that may arise on the matters enumerated in Section 75 of the Act. A reading of Section 75 of the Act would show that the ESI Court has full jurisdiction to decide all the matters arising between the employer and the Corporation under the Act. Section 75 of the Act sets out the matters to be decided by the ESI Court. As per Section 75(1)(g) of the Act, ESI Court is empowered t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the expression any other matter occurring in Section 75(1) (g) only means any other dispute between an employer and corporation or a person and Corporation pertaining to the contribution or benefit or other dues payable under the Act or any other matter required to be decided by ESI Court under the provisions of the Act. Grant or refusal of exemption by the appropriate government cannot be said to be a dispute between the employer and the Corporation. For grant or refusal of exemption, a specif .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(2005) 1 SCC 368, it was held that It is the cardinal rule of interpretation that where a statute provides that a particular thing should be done, it should be done in the manner prescribed and not in any other way . In Babu Verghese and Others vs. Bar Council of Kerala and Others, (1999) 3 SCC 422, it was held as under: 31. It is the basic principle of law long settled that if the manner of doing a particular act is prescribed under any statute, the act must be done in that manner or not at all .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version