Manufacturing process under ESI law extends to tailoring work using electric power, bringing the establishment within coverage.

A tailoring establishment employing more than ten but less than twenty persons and using electric power in stitching and ironing was held to fall within the notification under the Employees' State Insurance Act. The Court applied the principle that manufacture exists where a process brings into existence a new or different commodity with a distinctive name, character or use; stitching was treated as converting cloth into a commercially distinct article, and the electric iron formed part of the manufacturing process. On those facts, the establishment was covered by the Act and the employees were entitled to ESI coverage.

---

---

Issues: Whether a tailoring establishment employing more than ten but less than twenty persons and using an electric iron in stitching and ironing work was covered by the notification issued under Section 1(5) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948.

Analysis: The establishment employed the requisite number of persons and used electric power in the process of stitching and ironing. Stitching converted cloth into a commercially distinct article, and the use of electric iron formed part of the manufacturing process. The Court applied the principle that a process amounts to manufacture when it brings into existence a new or different commodity with a distinctive name, character, or use. On the facts found, the establishment fell within the description in the notification.

Conclusion: The establishment was covered by the Act and the employees were entitled to coverage.

---