Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether directors of a company receiving remuneration for discharge of assigned duties fall within the definition of "employee" under Section 2(9) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, and whether contribution is payable on such remuneration.
Analysis: The definition of "employee" under Section 2(9) is wide and covers persons employed from wages in or in connection with the work of the establishment. The definition of "wages" under Section 2(22) includes all remuneration paid or payable in cash to an employee. The earlier decision concerning a Managing Director was applied on the basis that a person may hold a dual capacity and remuneration for duties performed under the establishment's directions can constitute wages. On the facts, the company led no evidence to rebut the Corporation's finding that the directors were paid remuneration for duties entrusted to them.
Conclusion: Directors who are paid remuneration for discharge of assigned duties can fall within the definition of "employee" under the ESI Act, and contribution is payable on such remuneration.
Final Conclusion: The impugned orders were set aside and the employer's challenge to the contribution demand failed, leaving the Corporation's demand operative.
Ratio Decidendi: A director who receives remuneration for performing duties entrusted by the company may be treated as an employee under the ESI Act, and such remuneration constitutes wages for contribution purposes.