Employees' State Insurance coverage extends to casual loadmen directly engaged for loading work, with contribution liability upheld.

Section 2(9) of the Employees' State Insurance Act has wide scope and covers casual workers directly engaged by the principal employer, whether the work is done inside or outside the factory. On the facts, occasional loadmen used for loading and unloading bottles and sugar were not shown to be independent contractors or lorry owners, and the employer retained practical control over their engagement. The employer's inability to identify every worker did not defeat statutory duties under Sections 40 and 44. The loadmen were treated as employees under the Act, and the contribution demand was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the loadmen engaged for loading and unloading materials were employees within the meaning of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, and whether the employer was liable to pay contribution on that basis.

Analysis: Section 2(9) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 is of wide import and includes casual employees as well as persons directly employed by the principal employer, whether the work is done in the factory or elsewhere. On the facts, the appellant's own pleadings showed that it engaged outside loadmen occasionally for loading and unloading new bottles and sugar, and the work was not shown to be that of independent contractors or lorry owners. The court also noted that the employer had practical control over whether a person would be engaged for loading work, and that the inability to identify every worker was not a valid ground to avoid contribution in view of the employer's statutory duties under Sections 40 and 44.

Conclusion: The loadmen were held to be employees under the Act and the contribution demand was upheld against the employer.

---