REGIONAL DIRECTOR EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION JAIPUR Vs. ASSISTANT ENGINEER MUNICIPAL COUNCIL WATER WORKS GANGANAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal under sec. 82 (2) of the Employees' Insurance Act, 1948, hereinafter to be referred as the "act", lodged by the Regional Director on behalf of the Employees State Insurance Corporation, hereinafter to be referred as the "corporation", and is directed against the order of the Employees Insurance Court (Civil Judge), Ganganagar, dismissing an application made by the Corporation under sec. 75 (2) of the Act for the recovery of employees' contribution from the respondents in respect of the employees of the Water Works maintained by the Municipal Council of Ganganagar at Ganganagar.

(2.) THE Corporation averred that the Water Works maintained by the Municipal Council, Sri Ganganagar, was a factory as defined in sub-sec. 12 of sec. 2 of the Act and consequently the Municipal Council as employer was liable to pay contribution as required by sec. 40 (1) of the Act at the rates provided under sec. 39 read with Schedule I of the Act to the Corporation. THE period for which such contribution was not paid was from 1-4-60 to 30-9-65 and actual amount of wages paid to the employees covered by the Act for the aforesaid period as intimated by the Municipal Council came to Rs. 2,64,779. 29 paise. It was further alleged by the Corporation that no return showing the actual contribution week-wise had been furnished and consequently the rates of employees contribution had been fixed on the basis of an average of contribution payable in respect of all the wage groups of Schedule I prescribed under sec. 89 of the Act. THE Corporation proceeded to say that according to this formula the employees' contribution on the aforesaid wages came to Rs. 6619 48 paise as per schedule attached with the application. THE application was presented on 27-7-66.

(3.) THERE is, therefore, no escape from the conclusion that rule 17 of the Rules made by the Rajasthan State under the Act was ultra vires the powers of the State Government and was consequently invalid. THEREfore, the application moved by the Corporation cannot be said to be barred by the rule of limitation embodied in rule 17 of the Rules made by the State Government.