Loginmiraclelogistics
Asso.prof.(commerce & Management)
Harsh Kumar Mehta
Consultant In Labour Laws/hr
RAMU-HR
Manager-hr
Korgaonkar K A
Ba,llb,mpm,dir&pm,dll&lw,d.cyber
+2 Others

Respected seniors
This is Ramu working in manufacturing unit. I need one clarification about coverage of PF, ESI to loading & unloading workers if the work is being done not regularly. In our unit loading & unloading work is being done once in 3 or 4 days and it will be completed within 4 or 5 hours. Is it necessary to cover them with PF & ESI if the work is being done incidentally. Kindly give your valuable advise on this issue.
with regards
Ramu

From India, Vijayawada
Dear Ramu ji.
If the loading unloading work is carried out by registered toli under the Mathadi Board and payment is made by you to Mathadi Board, you are not liable for compliance under PF and ESIS.
But if the loading unloading work is carried out by non registered toli or by any other persons who are not registered as Mathadi and you are making the payment not the Mathadi Board and paying it to the employed persons, directly or otherwise, you are liable for PF as well as ESI.
in such case i.e. incidental loading unloading , you have no escape from ESI Contribution. You have to pay the Corporation at the rate 6.50% of total bill amount as ad-hoc payment. However, you CAN get relief under PF. I use the word here "CAN' and that too in capital, which you need to note it.

From India, Mumbai
Dear Ramu,

It's true more often than not ESI authorities used to assess for contribution on the charges/wages paid to hamalies/loading & unloading personnel quoting some provisions under ESI Act. We have to carefully study these provisions and accordingly conduct ourselves to avoid some intricacies. I would quote from our own illustration where similar demands were contested by us:

"It would be appropriate to consider the following instances where Loading & Unloading charges has been point of contention similar to ours. Your goodself would appreciate our views as also vindicated by the following ruling of various courts rendered on similar context. We herein quote here some of the relevant cases:

[ 3 ]

PAYMENT MADE TO RICKSHAW PULLERS, HATHRAIRY PULLERS AND TRUCK OPERATORS (INCLUDING LOADING & UNLOADING CHARGES WHEN THE LOADERS/UNLOADERS ARE THE EMPLOYEES OF THE TRUCK OPERATORS:

Rickshaw pullers, Hathrairy pullers and Truck Operators (who bring labour with them) no contribution is payable on the amount paid by the employer if the amount paid is lumpsum amount including loading/un-loading charges and no separate wages are paid by the employer.

Similar view was held by Bombay Division Bench in 1990 in the case of Raisaheb Tekchand, Mohate Mills Vs. R.D. ESIC.

HAMALIS/COOLIES EMPLOYED AT A PARTICULAR TIME:

Where Hamalies & Coolies are employed at a particular place and a particular time, outside the premises of the factory/establishment to perform a specific job on the spot in such cases no contribution is payable on the amount paid to such Coolies/Hamalis, however the contribution is payable on the amount paid to the coolies and hamalies for services rendered within the premises of the employer.

Bombay High Court in the case of Parley Bottling Co.Ltd. VS. ESIC,Bombay 1989 and

Supreme Court in the case of ESIC VS.Premier Clay Products, have held this view.....

-----------

Here you have to answer these pertinent questions:

1) Whose employees are those personnel who were utilised for the purpose

2) Where their services were utilised i.e. within the 'Premises' or outside and

3) Under whose supervision they performed the services.

If they were supervised by you and within your premises then there is no escape even if they are not on your own pay/muster rolls. Alternatively you should ensure that these personnel are covered by your contractor. If they are not there is every chance that they are added amongst your man power and ESI contribution is demanded.

Much also would depend on how often they have been engaged, repeatedly, directly or indirectly. It would be reasonable to have a labour contract on piece rate basis with them. Better consult your advocate as well using your circumstances.

Re. EPF we have to study the applicablity of the Act to your firm.

From India, Bangalore
Dear Kumar S.
Based on your views on ESI applicable on Loading unloading charges, need to share the copy of the Judgment of Various Court as mentioned in the above thread and or give the full citation with year & Court name to get it from Court Libarary.
Azim

From India, Mumbai
Dear Mr. Korgaonkar ji,
Good Morning, Iam Dinesh kumar.
Iam working as an HR in manufacturing sector in Chennai - Tamilnadu
Kindly explain what is "Mathadi Board". Whether it is applicable for all states in india.
Regards,
M. Dinesh kumar.

From India, Chennai
Dear Dinesh Kumar ji,
Mathadi Board is a board constituted under the Maharashtra Mathadi, Hamal and Other Manual Workers Act, 1969 to administer a scheme under this Act and it shall exercise such powers and perform such functions as may be conferred on it by the scheme.
This Act is enacted by Government of Maharashtra and implemented in its jurisdiction only.
According to my knowledge, there is no such or similar enactment by any other State Government. I am subjected to correction if there is such an enactment in other than Maharashtra.

From India, Mumbai
Sir(s),
I could not trace out the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Premier Clay Products as mentioned by one of contributor as above.However, a copy of the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Raj Kamal Transport Case of 1996 is enclosed herewith for kind information.

From India, Noida

Attached Files
File Type: pdf HAMMALIS-RAJKAMAL TRANSPORT SC-1996.pdf (12.8 KB, 312 views)

Dear Dinesh Kumar ji,
Thanks to our learned member Shri. Harsh Kumar Mehta ji for providing the Judgement Hamallis. On reading the Judgment, I came to know that Andhra Pradesh has similar Act like Maharashtra viz. A.P. Muttah Jattu Hamal and other Manual Workers (Regulation of Employment & Welfare) Act, 1976.
May be, other States have similar enactments.

From India, Mumbai
Also pl.refer the following case law on the subject:-
Karnataka High Court Judgment-ref link:
MFA No.967/1999 - ESIC, Bangalore Vs. The Belgaum Consumers Co-op Whole Sale Stores Ltd.
file:///C:/DOCUME~1/Admin/LOCALS~1/Temp/MFA967-99-12-01-2001.pdf

From India, Bangalore
This discussion thread is closed. If you want to continue this discussion or have a follow up question, please post it on the network.
Add the url of this thread if you want to cite this discussion.






About Us Advertise Contact Us
Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service



All rights reserved @ 2021 Cite.Co™