JUDGMENT K. S. Radhakrishnan, J. 1. Original Petition Nos. 2828 of 1994 to 2662 of 1996 are filed by contractors of certain abkari shops and O.P. No. 9880 of 1993 to 901 of 1994 (eight O.Ps.) are filed by various associations representing the employees of various abkari shops. 2. Main question that has come up for consideration in all these cases, is as to whether remuneration paid to employees for working on paid-holidays can be treated as wages within the meaning of S.2 (m) of the Kerala Abkari Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1989, so as to enable the employers to make contribution to the Fund constituted under the Act. For the promotion of the welfare of and for paying pension to the Abkari workers in the State of Kerala, the above mentioned Act was enacted which came into force on 15th July 1989. S.4 of the Act deals with contribution to the fund to be paid by the employer. S.4 is extracted below: "4. Contribution to the Fund. (I) The contribution which shall be paid by employer to the fund shall be ten per cent of the wages for the time being payable to each of the abkari worker and the abkari workers' contribution shall be equal to the contribution payable by the employer in respect of him in the manner specified in the Scheme. (2) The employer shall, in addition to the contribution payable under sub-section (1), contribute to the Fund as gratuity an amount equal to five per cent of the wages for the time being payable to each of the abkari worker: Provided that where the amount of any contribution payable under this Act involves a fraction of a rupee, the scheme may provide for the rounding off of such fraction to the nearest rupee." 3. Section II of the Act deals with determination of amounts due from employers, which says the Chief Welfare Fund Inspector or any other Welfare Fund Inspector authorised by him in this behalf, may, by order, determine the amount due from any employer under the provisions of the Act or the Scheme. Section II of the Act deals with determination of amounts due from employers, which says the Chief Welfare Fund Inspector or any other Welfare Fund Inspector authorised by him in this behalf, may, by order, determine the amount due from any employer under the provisions of the Act or the Scheme. S.2 (m) of the Act defines the term 'wages' as follows: " 'Wages' means all emoluments which are earned by an abkari worker while on duty or on leave with wages in accordance with the terms of the contract of employment and which are paid or payable in cash to him but does not include (i) the cash value of any food concession, and (ii) overtime allowance, bonus and commission. 4. State was empowered to frame a Scheme to be called the Abkari Workers Welfare Fund Scheme for the establishment of a Fund under the Act, for the purpose of payment of pension, for payment of provident fund, for payment of gratuity, for payment of family pension, for payment of financial assistance to a member who suffers from permanent disablement, etc. In compliance with the said provisions various employers paid contribution to the Fund for the period the employees had worked. 5. Statutorily employees are eligible to get wages for holidays under the various enactments. However, because of the peculiar nature of work, employers used to employ some employees during holidays as well, even though those holidays are paid holidays. An employee who is working more than working hours on a normal working day or in a week is legally entitled to get overtime allowance. As per S.2 (m) of the Act, remuneration received by an employee for overtime work cannot be considered as wages since the same is specifically excluded from the definition. While the employers maintain the stand that amounts paid to the employees during paid holidays will come within the term overtime allowance and therefore excluded from the definition of wages under S.2 (m) of the Act, employees maintain the stand that amounts paid to them are not overtime allowance, but actual wages since they have worked at the volition of the employers, even though those days are paid holidays. It is their case they are getting paid holidays on the basis of statutory provisions as of right and not as a concession granted by employers. It is their case they are getting paid holidays on the basis of statutory provisions as of right and not as a concession granted by employers. Therefore whether they are getting wages during paid holidays is of no consequence as far as the employers are concerned. 6. Counsel for the petitioners referred to some of the decisions such as M/s Philips India Ltd. v. Labour Court, Madras A.I.R. 1985 S.C. 1034, Abid Hussain v. Union of India 1987 (1) S.C.C. 532 , Municipal Committee, Moga v. Labour Inspector, Moga 1982 (1) S.C.C. 407 , etc. Reference was also made to some of the provisions of Kerala Industrial (National Festival Holidays) Act, 1958 and Minimum Wages Act, Factories Act, etc. 7. I am of the view that the decision cited as well as the provisions referred to are not relevant for the matter in issue. In fact in a recent decision in Indian Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Employees State Insurance Corporation, (Civil Appeal No. 2777 of 1980, dated 6th November 1996), Supreme Court has taken the view that overtime allowance paid to an employee by an employer is also wages within the meaning of S.2 (22) of the State Insurance Act, 1948- In the said case, Supreme Court rejected the contention that in the absence of such mutual obligations under a contract, it cannot be considered to be 'wages' within the meaning of S.2 (22) of the Act. In fact Supreme Court has taken the view that payment of overtime allowance itself is an implied contract and therefore remuneration paid does form part of wages. Same principle can be made applicable to the instant case as well. 8. In the instant case, employers employ the employees on holidays. Same cannot be said to be overtime work. Overtime work evidently means work done by an employee after the normal working hours. In the instant case employees themselves have to be present for work on paid holidays and not on a holiday on which they are on duty under normal circumstances. In fact an identical question came up for consideration before this Court in Surendran v. State of Kerala 1993 (2) KLT 203 wherein interpreting almost similar provision, this Court took the view that employers are bound to contribute to Toddy Workers Welfare Fund towards wages paid to an employee even during paid holidays. In fact an identical question came up for consideration before this Court in Surendran v. State of Kerala 1993 (2) KLT 203 wherein interpreting almost similar provision, this Court took the view that employers are bound to contribute to Toddy Workers Welfare Fund towards wages paid to an employee even during paid holidays. It was felt that even an employee attends or discharges his duties even on a day which he is entitled to treat as a holiday with wages, he can only be considered as on duty and what is payable to him is also bound to be treated as emoluments earned by him while on duty. I am in respectful agreement with the above said decision. 9. In view of the above mentioned legal position, I am inclined to hold that employers covered by the Kerala Abkari Workers Welfare Fund Act and Scheme are bound to make contribution to the Fund with regard to wages paid to the employees who have worked even on paid holidays. It is so declared. Petitioners in O.P. Nos. 2828, and 2966/94, 3082/95 and 1672, 1944 and 2662 of 1996 are therefore directed to pay contribution to Welfare Fund as demanded by the authorities concerned. Original Petitions are accordingly disposed of.