DEPUTY DIRECTOR Vs. CYRSTAL INTERNATIONAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The First Appeal has been preferred challenging the judgment dtd. 10/12/2014 passed by the Employees' State Insurance Court allowing the Application of Respondent-establishment filed under Sec. 75 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, challenging the order dtd. 25/2/2009 passed by the Employees State Insurance Corporation claiming contribution. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to by their status before the Trial Court.

(2.) The Applicant is a garment manufacturer and had out-sourced certain works like embroidery, stitching, etc. to outside concerns. During the visit by the Insurance Inspector, it was found that there was substantial payment made towards such work and no contribution was paid towards those amounts and thus, contribution was claimed.

(3.) The order was challenged before the ESI Court and contention was that the work outsourced was given to independent establishments which are located away from the Applicant's factory and Applicant does not have any control over the operations of those establishments. It was contended that the relationship was principal to principal basis and the Opponent without identifying the eligible employees and without considering the relationship between the Applicant and independent agencies have claimed contribution. It was further contended that records were made available during the visit of Insurance Inspector, however, the same had not been considered.