Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: apprentice preference in Employees State Insurance ... vs Andhra Pradesh Private Limited, ... on 3 March, 2000Matching Fragments
7. Similarly, a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court in Regional Director E.S.I. Corporation v. M/s. Fibre Mangalore (P) Limited, has held as follows:
"Inspector found on inspection that 25 persons were working in a factory. Based on the report, the company was asked to pay ESI by the Regional Director ESI Corporation, Company resisted the claim stating that only 11 persons are regular employees and 11 persons are trainees and apprentices and therefore denied its liability to pay contribution till 1st August, 1974. Application filed by the company under ESI Act was allowed that it was held that trainees were not employees and as such the factory had not erred under ESI Act till 1st August, 1974. Dismissing the appeal preferred by Regional Director ESI, held that mere apprentice or trainee would not be an employee as defined in Section 2(9) of the ESI Act in view of the pronouncement of the Supreme Court in the case of ESI Corporation v. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Company, 1976 LLJ 81".