JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. This appeal arises under the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 under Section 82 thereof. The substantial questions of law which appellant seeks to raise are as under: (i) Whether the payments made to the employees as production incentive under the periodical scheme and the night shift allowance are covered by the definition of 'wages' given in Section 2(22) of the Act? (ii) Whether the conductors and drivers employed by the Corporation who have no duties with regard to the production as such can be said to be covered by the provisions of the Act? 3. It is not in dispute that the appellant Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation is an establishment to which Act of 1948 applies. The controversy as emanating from the aforesaid two questions centres around two issues namely whether the production incentive paid to its employees and night shift allowance paid to the workers is included in the definition of "wages" under the Act for the purpose of computing the contribution to be made by the employer towards State Employees Insurance Scheme and second question arises about the inclusion of the conductors and drivers employed by the Corporation within the meaning of its employees for the purposes of Act of 1948. 4. The definition of "wages" under Section 2(22) reads as under: "Wages" means all remuneration paid or payable in cash to an employee, if the terms of the contract of employment, express or implied, were fulfilled and Includes any payment to an employee in respect of any period of authorised leave, lock-out, strike which is not illegal or lay-off and other additional remuneration, if any paid at intervals not exceeding two months but does not include- (a) any contribution paid by the employer to any pension fund or provident fund, or under this Act; (b) any travelling allowance or the value of any travelling concession; (c) any sum paid to the person employed to defray special expenses entailed on him by the nature of his employment; of (d) any gratuity payable or discharge. A perusal of the definition goes to show that it includes everything payable to the employee by way of remuneration, except item Nos. (a) to (d) exclusively excluded from the purview of remuneration to be treated as wages. A perusal of the definition goes to show that it includes everything payable to the employee by way of remuneration, except item Nos. (a) to (d) exclusively excluded from the purview of remuneration to be treated as wages. The production incentive or any amount paid by way of incentive is only referable to as part of remuneration or additional remuneration. The term all 'remuneration paid or payable' is of wide amplitude to include whatever is payable by the employer to his employee. The construction of such wide amplitude is only to be found in exclusion clause of definition. The only thing required is that such amount in cash must be payable on fulfilment of terms of contract. 5. The possible contention about expression 'the term of contract of an employment under which wages are payable' refers to only those terms of employment which are made applicable at the time of initiation into employment or subsequent variations in the wages under the various schemes also is included then term of contract, in my opinion, no more remain in doubt in view of the decision of Supreme Court in Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Employees' State Insurance Corporation, (1997) 9 SCC 71 . The issue raised in the aforesaid case was whether in the absence of any stipulation in the original contract of employment overtime wages would stand excluded from the definition of 'wages' under Section 2(22) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948. The Court answered in the negative. While dismissing the appeal filed by the employer for its exclusion from the purview of wages it said: "The legislature rather recognised the fact of the employer engaging, by contract express or implied, the services of the existing employee for doing overtime work and paying the remuneration. By employing the exclusive definition in Section 2(22), the legislature intended to bring in, by legal fiction, something within the accepted connotation though not strictly included within its ambit. The legislature by defining "employee", having had the knowledge of the payment of the remuneration for overtime work done by the employee and having excluded it in Section 2(9), the omission thereof in the definition of Section 2(22) excluding Items (a) to (d), would be eloquent and meaningful. Whatever remuneration, paid or payable for overtime work, forms wages under an implied term of the contract. Whatever remuneration, paid or payable for overtime work, forms wages under an implied term of the contract. The object thereby is clear that the overtime work done by the employee is an implied contract to do overtime and the remuneration paid therefore does form part of the wages under Section 2(22). Concomitantly, the employer is enjoined to pay the contribution under that Act and should be required to be complied with." The Court further said: "The contract of employment is entered into only at the initial entry into the service. In the course of the employment, as and when the employer finds the need to have work done expeditiously, in addition to the normal work during the course of the working hours, the employer offers to the employee to do overtime work after the working hours. When an employee does overtime work, it amounts to acceptance of the same. There emerges concluded implied contract between the employer and employee. There is no need to write on each occasion separately on the letter of appointment. It becomes an integral part of original or revised contract of employment from time to time. Therefore, both the remunerations received during the working hours and overtime constitute composites wages and thereby it is a wage within the meaning of Section 2(22) of the Act." The aforesaid ratio clearly postulates whenever during the continuance of the employment an employer offers any work for payment of additional remuneration whether by way of overtime wages or incentive affecting particular result for himself and the employee is required to fulfil that expectation which brings into existence and implied contract. A term of contract whether express or implied, which entitles the employee to the incentive offers, it becomes part of the remuneration within the meaning of definition of "wages' as envisaged under Section 2(22). Once it becomes part of the wages, its exclusion is only possible if it falls in one or other category of the excluding clauses (a) to (d) of Section 2(22). It is not the case of the appellant that the production incentive which was payable to its employee under the scheme floated by the Corporation is excluded under any of said clauses. 6. It is not the case of the appellant that the production incentive which was payable to its employee under the scheme floated by the Corporation is excluded under any of said clauses. 6. The night shift allowance as well as incentive both have been held to be the part of wages in earlier decision of Supreme Court in Harihar Polyfibres v. Regional Director, (1984) 4 SCC 324 . 7. The principle was again stated by the Supreme Court slightly in different shades in Handloom House, Emakulam v. Regional Director, (1999) 4 SCC 7 . The Court following the decision in Harihar Polyfibres's case (supra) that the main body of definition of "wages' under Section 2(22) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 encompasses within its fold three kinds of payments made to the employees. The first is, all remuneration paid or payable in cash or fulfilment of the terms of employment. The second is any payment made to an employee in respect of any period of authorised leave etc. The third is, "other additional remuneration paid at intervals not exceeding two months". The word 'other' appearing at the commencement of the third part of the definition of wages under Section 2(22) indicates that it must be remuneration or additional remuneration other than that referred to in the earlier part of the definition. Incentive bonus is certainly an additional remuneration. The moment one gets any additional remuneration other than the remuneration payable under the contract of employment and if such additional remuneration is paid at intervals not exceeding two months, it becomes 'wages' by virtue of the third part of the definition of 'wages'. 8. In view thereof, the Question No. (i) stated by the appellant must be answered in affirmative that is to say in favour of the respondent and against the appellant. 9. The second controversy which is raised by the appellant in this case is that the conductors and drivers employed by the Corporation who have no duties with regard to the production as such cannot be said to be employees covered by the provisions of the Act. This question, in my opinion, really does not need much elaboration inasmuch as the answer is self-evident. 10. The expression 'employee' has been defined in Section 2(22) of the Act. This question, in my opinion, really does not need much elaboration inasmuch as the answer is self-evident. 10. The expression 'employee' has been defined in Section 2(22) of the Act. Not only a person employed for wages in a factory or establishment to which this Act applies but also includes within the ambit any person employed by the Corporation of factory. For the appellant Corporation which is engaged in the business of transportation it cannot be said that conductors and drivers who are employed for the purpose of carrying on the business to transport are not engaged in connection with the work of the establishment. In that view of the matter, the Question No. (ii) must also be against the appellant. 11. Accordingly, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. 12. Interim order shall stand vacated.Misc. Appeal dismissed. *******