Judgment :- K. GNANAPRAKASAM, J. This is an appeal filed by the Employees' State Insurance Corporation as against the order dated November 27, 1989, passed by the Employees' State Insurance Court, Vellore, in E.S.I.O.P. No. 5 of 1988. The first respondent herein, namely, North Arcot District Consumers Wholesale Society Ltd. was registered under Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act and the employees of the said society are covered under the provisions of the Employees' State Insurance Act and they have been paying the contribution for those employees. The appellant by its notice dated July 23, 1987, called upon the respondents to pay contribution in respect of wages paid to the workers who are employed for "cleaning commodities" and also for wages paid to the workers who are "loading and unloading" the goods. As the respondent has not come forward to pay the contribution as demanded, the appellant passed an order under Section 45-A of the Employees' State Insurance Act. As against the same, the respondents herein filed an application under Section 75 of the Employees' State Insurance Act. The said action was resisted by the appellant herein. But, however, the Employees' State Insurance Court has held that the respondent is not liable to pay contribution in respect of amounts paid to the workers referred to above and allowed the petition. Aggrieved by the same, the Employees' State Insurance Corporation has filed this appeal. The respondent examined its godown-keeper as P.W.-1 who had deposed that the respondent Co-operative society was engaged in procuring the commodities in wholesale and distributing the same to village co-operative societies. The commodities procured by them were cleaned by them, for which they used to employ the workers, now and then. After cleaning the commodities, they used to distribute the same to the several village co-operative societies. No doubt he has deposed that they used to employ those persons as and when necessary for cleaning and also for loading and unloading the commodities. The Superintendent, in the respondent's society, Vedavalli, was examined as P.W.-2, who also supports the evidence of P.W.-1. The appellant examined its Inspector as R.W.-1, who had deposed that he had inspected the respondent's society and found out the payments made as loading and unloading charges and the amount paid for cleaning, were not taken into account for the payment of contribution.Mr. The appellant examined its Inspector as R.W.-1, who had deposed that he had inspected the respondent's society and found out the payments made as loading and unloading charges and the amount paid for cleaning, were not taken into account for the payment of contribution.Mr. G. Desappan, learned counsel for respondent, has submitted that it is the regular feature for the respondent, who procure commodities in wholesale and distribute the same to the village societies and the commodities so purchased were also cleaned by the workers for whom they have paid wages. As the procurement and the distribution are the regular features in the respondent's establishment, the respondent shall be liable to pay contribution. The commodities so procured are admittedly cleaned by the workers employed by the respondent, for whom they pay wages. It is further urged that the respondent is liable to pay contribution for the said workers. It is further submitted that even if the workers were employed for a day only, the establishment is liable to pay contribution. It is also submitted that the wages paid to the workers for loading and unloading also, the respondent establishment is liable to pay contribution, in view of the decision rendered by the Apex court in the case of Rajkamal Transport Corporation v. Employees' State Insurance Corporation (1996-II-LLJ-435)(SC). The respective submissions of the learned advocate for the appellant and the respondent have been carefully considered by me. It is not in dispute that the respondent has been procuring the commodities in wholesale for which they have to engage a lorry to transport goods. Goods so procured are cleaned by the workers, for whom they pay wages. After cleaning, the respondent send the goods to various village societies, for which they have to transport the cleaned commodities. It shows that the procurement of commodities, loading and unloading of the commodities and cleaning of commodities are all regular features in the respondent's society. Goods so procured are cleaned by the workers, for whom they pay wages. After cleaning, the respondent send the goods to various village societies, for which they have to transport the cleaned commodities. It shows that the procurement of commodities, loading and unloading of the commodities and cleaning of commodities are all regular features in the respondent's society. As it has already been held by the Apex Court in the case of Rajkamal Transport Corporation v. Employees' State Insurance Corporation (supra), that the charges paid to the hamalis for loading and unloading, the establishment is liable to pay contribution, I have to necessarily hold that on the amount paid as wages for loading and unloading, the respondent is liable to pay contribution.In the same manner, the wages paid for cleaning the commodities, which is also a regular feature, the respondent establishment is liable to pay the contribution. Due to the change of law that have taken place in the passage of time, the findings given by the Employees' Insurance Court are not acceptable and, hence, I have to set aside the said findings and I have to hold that the respondent establishment is liable to pay contribution in respect of the wages paid for loading and unloading and also for wages paid to the workers for cleaning the commodities. In the result, the civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed. No costs.