9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Interpretation of Section 2(14) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 to determine who can be considered an 'insured person' under the Act. Analysis: The case involved a dispute regarding the status of an employee, who had lost his life in an accident, as an 'insured person' under Section 2(14) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948. The High Court had held that the deceased employee could not be treated as an insured person as the registration for insurance was granted after his death. The employer argued that the obligation to pay contributions existed even before registration with the Corporation, citing relevant provisions like Rule 58(2)(b) of the Employees' State Insurance (Central) Rules, 1950. The Corporation contended that the Act was beneficial to employees, even if not registered. The claimant argued that registration was a prerequisite for coverage under the Act. The pivotal provision in question, Section 2(14) of the Act, defines an 'insured person' as someone for whom contributions are payable under the Act, entitling them to benefits provided by the Act. The employer's obligation to pay contributions arises once the Act applies to the factory or establishment, regardless of registration status. Precedents highlighted that the date of payment of contributions is not crucial, as the Act imposes a statutory obligation on the employer to insure its employees from the date of employment. The Act's scheme, Rules, and Regulations distinguish insurance under the Act from general insurance contracts. Contributions fund benefits for accidents, disablement, sickness, maternity, etc., and are not refunded if benefits are not availed. Various provisions define terms like 'wage period,' 'benefit period,' and 'contribution period,' outlining the computation of benefits in cases of employment injuries leading to death before the first benefit period. Ultimately, the Supreme Court held that the deceased employee was indeed an 'insured person' under the Act, as he suffered an employment injury and was in the employer's employment. The Court emphasized that the High Court erred in its interpretation, and the Corporation was directed to extend benefits to eligible persons. The civil appeal was allowed without costs. This judgment clarifies the interpretation of Section 2(14) of the Act, emphasizing the statutory obligation of the employer to insure employees from the date of employment, irrespective of registration timing. The decision underscores the Act's distinct insurance framework and the entitlement of employees to benefits under the Act, even in the absence of immediate registration with the Corporation.
|
