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.