Judgment Javed Iqbal Wani, J. MA 7/2021(CM 2776/2021) is segregated from these bunch of appeals and order passed separately. 1. The instant appeals have been filed by the appellants under Section 82 of the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 (for brevity ‘the Act’) against the orders (for brevity ‘impugned orders’) passed by the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Jammu (for brevity ‘Insurance Court’) in their petitions filed b y the appellants under Section 75 (g) of the Act. 2. The appeals are taken up for final disposal together with the consent of counsel for the parties, in that, common issues /questions are being raised therein these appeals. 3. Before adverting to the grounds of challenge urged by the appellants in the instant appeals, it would be appropriate and advantageous to refer hereunder to various provisions of the Act being relevant herein:- 4. Sub-section 3 of Section 1 of the Act, provides as under:- (3) It shall come into force on such date or dates as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint, and different dates may be appointed for different provisions of this Act and [for different States or for different parts thereof]. Sub-section 3 of Section 1 of the Act, provides as under:- (3) It shall come into force on such date or dates as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint, and different dates may be appointed for different provisions of this Act and [for different States or for different parts thereof]. Sub-Section 4 of Section 1, provides as under:- “It shall apply, in the first instance, to all factories (including factories belonging to the [Government]) other than seasonal factories.” Section 2 (9) defines “employee” and reads as under:- “employee” means any person employed for wages in or in connection with the work of a factory or establishment to which this Act applies and - (i) who is directly employed by the principal employer on any work of, or incidental or preliminary to or connected with the work of, the factory or establishment, whether such work is done by the employee in the factory or establishment or elsewhere ; or (ii) who is employed by or through an immediate employer on the premises of the factory or establishment or under the supervision of the principal employer or his agent on work which is ordinarily part of the work of the factory or establishment or which is preliminary to the work carried on in or incidental to the purpose of the factory or establishment ; or (iii) whose services are temporarily lent or let on hire to the principal employer by the person with whom the person whose services are so lent or let on hire has entered into a contract of service; [and includes any person employed for wages on any work connected with the administration of the factory or establishment or any part, department or branch thereof or with the purchase of raw materials for, or the distribution or sale of the products of, the factory or establishment ; [or any person engaged as an apprentice, not being an apprentice engaged under the Apprentices Act, 1961 (52 of 1961), [and includes such person engaged as apprentice whose training period is extended to any length of time] but does not include] (a) any member of 3 [the Indian] naval, military or air forces ; or (b) any person so employed whose wages (excluding remuneration for overtime work) exceed 5 [such wages as may be prescribed by the Central Government] : (c) Provided that an employee whose wages (excluding remuneration for overtime work) exceed 5 [such wages as may be prescribed by the Central Government] at any time after (and not before) the beginning of the contribution period, shall continue to be an employee until the end of that period]. Section 2 (12) defines “factory” as under:- “factory” means any premises including the precincts thereof: (a) whereon ten or more persons are employed or were employed on any day of the preceding twelve months, and in any part of which a manufacturing process is being carried on or is ordinarily so carried on with the aid of power or is ordinarily so carried on, or (b) Whereon twenty or more persons are employed or were employed for wages on any day of the preceding twelve months, and in any part of which a manufacturing process is being carried on without the aid of power or is ordinarily so carried on, but does not include a mine subject to the operation of the Mines Act, 1952 (35 of 1952) or a railway running shed.” Sections 2 (13-A) and (14) defines “insurable employment” and “insured person” respectively:- [(13A) “insurable employment” means an employment in a factory or establishment to which this Act applies;] (e) (14) “insured person” means a person who is or was an employee in respect of whom contributions are or were payable under this Act and who is by reason thereof, entitled to any of the benefits provided by this Act” Section 3 of the Act provides for the establishment of Employees’ State Insurance Corporation and reads as under:- “Establishment of Employees’ State Insurance Corporation.-(1) With effect from such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint in this behalf, there shall be established for the administration of the scheme of Employees’ State Insurance in accordance with the provisions of this Act a Corporation to be known as the Employees’ State Insurance Corporation. (2) The Corporation shall be a body corporate by the name of Employees’ State Insurance Corporation having perpetual succession and a common seal and shall by the said name sue and be sued.” Section 38 provides that all employees in factories/establishments to which the Act applies shall be insured. Section 39 provides for the “contributions” and reads as under:- Contributions. (1) The contribution payable under this Act in respect of an employee shall comprise contribution payable by the employer (hereinafter referred to as the employer’s contribution) and contribution payable by the employee (hereinafter referred to as the employee’s contribution) and shall be paid to the Corporation. Section 39 provides for the “contributions” and reads as under:- Contributions. (1) The contribution payable under this Act in respect of an employee shall comprise contribution payable by the employer (hereinafter referred to as the employer’s contribution) and contribution payable by the employee (hereinafter referred to as the employee’s contribution) and shall be paid to the Corporation. Section 74 provides for Constitution of Employees’ Insurance Court and reads as under:- Constitution of Employees’ Insurance Court.-(1) The [State] Government shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute an Employees’ Insurance Court for such local area as may be specified in the notification. (2) The Court shall consist of such number of judges as the 1 [State] Government may think fit (3) Any person who is or has been a judicial officer or is a legal practitioner of five years’ standing shall be qualified to be a Judge of the Employees’ Insurance Court. (4) The State Government may appoint the same Court for two or more local areas or two or more Courts for the same local area. (5) Where more than one Court has been appointed for the same local area, the [State] Government may by general or special order regulate the distribution of business between them.” Section 75 provides for matters to be decided by the Employees’ Insurance Court and (g) reads as under:- (g) any other matter which is in dispute between a principal employer and the Corporation, or between a principal employer and an immediate employer, or between a person and the Corporation or between an employee and a principal or immediate employer, in respect of any contribution or benefit or other dues payable or recoverable under this Act, [or any other matter required to be or which may be decided by the Employees’ Insurance Court under this Act], such question or dispute 4 [subject to the provisions of sub-section (2A)] shall be decided by the Employees’ Insurance Court in accordance with the provisions of this Act. Section 78 of the Act provides for Powers of Employees’ Insurance Court and reads as under:- (1) The Employees’ Insurance Court shall have all the powers of a Civil Court for the purposes of summoning and enforcing the attendance of wit-nesses, compelling the discovery and production of documents and material objects, administering oath and recording evidence and such court shall be deemed to be a Civil Court within the meaning of 1[section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)]. (2) The Employees’ Insurance Court shall follow such procedure as may be prescribed by rules made by the State Government. (3) All costs incidental to any proceeding before an Employees’ Insurance Court shall, subject to such rules as may be made in this behalf by the State Government, be in the discretion of the court. (4) An order of the Employees’ Insurance Court shall be enforceable as if it were a decree passed in a suit by a Civil Court.” Section 82 provides for appeals and reads as under:- Section 82 provides for appeals and reads as under:- 82. Appeal.-(1) Save as expressly provided in this section, no appeal shall lie from an order of an Employees’ Insurance Court. (2) An appeal shall lie to the High Court from an order of an Employees’ Insurance Court if it involves a substantial question of law. (3) The period of limitation for an appeal under this section shall be sixty days. (4) The provisions of sections 5 and 12 of the 1[Limitation Act, 1963 (36 of 1963)] shall apply to appeals under this section.” 5. The facts as emerging from the instant appeals would reveal that the Central Government issued Notification No. S-38013/9/89-SSI dated 06.10 1989 in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (3) of Section (1) the Act, providing 06.10.1989 as a date for application of the provisions of Chapters IV, V and VI in various areas of the State of Jammu and Kashmir ( Union Territory now), namely:- Kashmir Division Area Had Bast No. 1. Municipal limits of Srinagar City ty6 - 2. Municipal Limits of Srinagar Cantt - 3. Village Khanmoh 246 4. Rangreth in Budgam District 284 5. Pampor 105 6. Luyan 98 7. Lathjpora 92 8. Khrew 15 9. Budgam 63 Jammu Division (1) Jammu 1. Municipal Limits of Jammu City - 2. Cantonment Limits of Jammu Cantt - 3. Municipal limits of Srinagar City ty6 - 2. Municipal Limits of Srinagar Cantt - 3. Village Khanmoh 246 4. Rangreth in Budgam District 284 5. Pampor 105 6. Luyan 98 7. Lathjpora 92 8. Khrew 15 9. Budgam 63 Jammu Division (1) Jammu 1. Municipal Limits of Jammu City - 2. Cantonment Limits of Jammu Cantt - 3. Village Miran Sahib (Ban Sultan) 37 4. Muthi 190 5. Gangyal 155 (2) Bari Brahmana 1. Herpur 208 2. Mein Sarkar 206 3. Mein Charkan 205 4. Lesi Khurd 220 5. Samailpur 201 6. Kartholi 203 7. Bishnah 230 (3) Kathua 1. Chak Raju 79 2. Chak Ram Singh 70 3. Jagatpur 62 4. Chak Khuni 69 6. In terms of the Notification (supra) the provisions of Chapter, IV V, and VI, except Section 44 and 45 and Section 1 of Section 76 and Sections 77, 78, 79 and 81 of the Act, became applicable to all the factories /establishments other than seasonal factories in the aforesaid areas. 7. A Notification/SRO 291 dated 05.09.2003 came to be issued by the Government of Jammu and Kashmir, Housing and Urban Development, Department in exercise of powers conferred by Sub-section (3) Section 3 of the Jammu and Kashmir Municipal Corporation Act, 2000, where under the Government included various areas shown in the annexure to the said Notification/SRO within the Municipal area of Municipal Corporation, Jammu, thereby extending the Municipal limits of Jammu City. 8. The appellants herein being factories/establishments claimed to have filed their respective petitions under Section 75(g) of the Act before the Insurance Court for settlement of dispute raised by them that their factories/establishments does not fall within the areas notified under Sub-section 3 of Section (1) of the Act and consequently sought refund of the contribution made by them with the respondents under the Act. 9. 9. The moot point raised by the appellant before the Insurance Court had been that there has been no fresh notification issued by the Central Government under Sub-section (3) of Section 1 of the Act in respect of the areas wherein their factories/establishments exist under which areas were subsequently included within the Municipal limits of Jammu city in terms of notification/SRO 291 and that the provisions of the Act could not have been made applicable to them, unless a fresh notification for the said included areas of the Municipal limits of Jammu city had not been issued by the Central Government in terms of Sub-section 3 of Section 1 of the Act. 10. The appellants thus, while seeking settlement of the dispute so raised by them before the Insurance Court also prayed for re-fund of the contribution made by them along with an interest. The Insurance Court however, did not agree with the contentions raised by the appellants herein and instead dismissed their respective petitions, whereupon the appellants have instituted the instant appeals challenging the said orders of the Insurance Court. 11. The appellants have challenged the impugned orders passed by the Insurance Court in their respective appeals on multiple grounds mainly and fundamentally on the ground that in absence of a fresh notification by the Central Government under Sub-section 3 of Section 1 of the Act, in respect of the areas wherein their factories/establishments exist after the said areas were included within the Municipal limits of the Jammu City, the provisions of the Act cannot be made applicable to their respective factories /establishments and the contribution made by them is liable to be refunded by the respondents. 12. The appellants in addition to the grounds urged in their respective appeals have also stated various questions styling the same as substantial questions of law, including a common question about the application of the Act in absence of a fresh notification by the Central Government under Sub-section (3) of Section 1 of the Act and the applicability of the provisions of the Act to their factories/establishments notwithstanding the subsequent inclusion of areas within the Municipal limits of Jammu City, wherein their factories/establishments exist. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 13. Learned appearing counsels for the parties while making their submissions reiterated the contentions raised and grounds urged in their respective pleadings. 14. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 13. Learned appearing counsels for the parties while making their submissions reiterated the contentions raised and grounds urged in their respective pleadings. 14. Having regard to the issues involved in these instant appeals, following substantial question of law emerges for consideration before this Court:- “Whether Notification No. S-38013/9/89-SSI dated 06.10 1989 issued by Central Government became applicable automatically to a factory/establishment in an area which was subsequently included in the Municipal limits of Jammu city, upon issuance of SRO 291 dated 05.09.2003 or that a fresh/new notification was mandatorily required to be issued by the Central Government for such included areas in terms of Sub-Section 3 of Section 1 of the Act for the application of the Act.” 15. Before dealing with the question (supra) following judgments of the Apex Court need to be referred hereunder being germane herein:- 16. The Apex Court in case titled as Employees” State Insurance Corporation vs. M/s Harrison Malayalam Pvt. Ltd, reported in 1993 (4) SCC 361 , provided as under:- “………The scheme under the Act for insuring the workmen for conferring on them benefits in case of accident, disablement, sickness, maternity etc. is distinct from the contract of insurance in general. Under the Act, the scheme is more akin to group insurance. The contribution paid entitles the workman insured to the benefit under the Act. However, he does not get any part of the contribution back if during the benefit period, he does not qualify for any of the benefits. The contribution made by him and by his employer is credited to the insurance fund created under the Act and it becomes available for others or for himself, during other benefit periods, if he continues in employment. What is more, there is no relation between contribution made and the benefit availed of. The contribution is uniform for all workmen and is a percentage of the wages earned by them. It has no relation to the risks against which the workman stands statutorily insured. It is for this reason that the Act envisages automatic obligation to pay the contribution once the factory or the establishment is covered by the Act, and the obligation to pay the contribution commences from the date of the application of the Act to such factory or establishment. It is for this reason that the Act envisages automatic obligation to pay the contribution once the factory or the establishment is covered by the Act, and the obligation to pay the contribution commences from the date of the application of the Act to such factory or establishment. The obligation ceases only when the Act ceases to apply to the factory/establishment. The obligation to make contribution does not depend upon whether the particular employee or employees cease to be employed employees after the contribution period and the benefit period expire.” 17. Further, the Apex Court in case titled as M/s Cochin Shipping Co. vs. E.S.I Corporation, reported in 1992 (4) SCC 245 , provided at paragraphs 14 and 15 as under:- “14. The Employees State Insurance Act is an Act to provide certain benefits to employees in case of sickness, maternity and employment injury and make provision for certain other matters in relation thereto. The Act is an outcome of a policy to provide remedy for the widespread evils arising from the consequences of national poverty. Indeed, it is a piece of social security. 15. Under Section 1 (4), in the first instance, it is made applicable to all factories. The Act envisages the extension of benefit to the employees in other establishments or class of establishments, industrial, commercial, agricultural or otherwise. The extension of benefit is to be done by means of a notification by the appropriate Government. Thus the benefits conferred by the Act cover a large area of employees than what the Factories Act and the akin legislations intended. The conclusion is inescapable that it is a welfare legislation. The endeavour of the Court should be to place a liberal construction so as to promote its objects to which a reference has been made.” 18. Keeping in mind the above provisions of the Act as also the judgments of the Apex Court (supra), it emerges that the Act is a social welfare legislation for extending certain benefits to the employees in case of certain eventualities/ contingencies, like in case of sickness, maternity and employment injury. The Act indisputably has been enacted for reducing the social disparity with its purpose to protect the employee. 19. The Act indisputably has been enacted for reducing the social disparity with its purpose to protect the employee. 19. Indisputably, the factories/establishments of the appellants herein have been brought within the purview of the Act, upon issuance of SRO 291 dated 05.09.2003, whereby new areas were included with the Municipal limits of Jammu City. Admittedly, the Municipal limits of Jammu City were made subject to the provisions of the Act upon issuance of Notification dated 06.10.1989 issued by the Central Government initially and thus, any area subsequently included within the Municipal limits of Jammu City would be deemed to have become subject to the provisions of the Act also on the premise that the applicability of Notification dated 06.10.1989 would be deemed to be coextensive and co-terminus with the issuance of any subsequent notification/SRO by the local Government, either including or excluding any area from the Municipal limits of Jammu City, as such, fresh/new Notification would not be required to be issued in this regard by the Central Government under Sub-section (3) of Section 1 of the Act. This would also be so in view of the principle that the construction furthering the policy and object of an Act, more beneficial to the employees has to be preferred, of course without doing violence to the language used by the legislature, as also in the light of settled principle that a beneficial piece of legislation has to be interpreted in such way as to assure a benefit and not to deny the same. 20. The question thus, raised in these appeals in view of the aforesaid analysis can safely be held not matching with the statement of the object and reasons of the Act. 21. The judgment referred by the counsel for the appellants titled M/s Anil Textiles Industry and others vs. Employees’ State Insurance Corporation reported in 1990 SCC Online Raj. 295, passed by the High Court of Rajasthan, in the facts and circumstances of the case is misplaced and misdirected and would not lend any support to the case of the appellants. Furthermore, the contention of the appellants that the Central Government issued fresh notification in respect of areas which were subsequently included within the Municipal limits in view of the aforesaid analysis pales into insignificance. Furthermore, the contention of the appellants that the Central Government issued fresh notification in respect of areas which were subsequently included within the Municipal limits in view of the aforesaid analysis pales into insignificance. Issuance of fresh/new notification for such an area per se would not mean that a fresh/new notification is required to be issued in all the cases or else the non-issuance of fresh/new notification for such newly included areas renders the provisions of the Act, inapplicable, cannot be accepted in view of above analysis. Newly included area also cannot be accepted in view of above analysis. 22. Viewed in the context what has been observed, considered and analyzed hereinabove, the impugned orders in the instant appeals does not call for any interference. Resultantly, the instant appeals fail and are, accordingly, dismissed. 23. Interim direction, if any, shall stand vacated. A copy of this judgment shall be placed on the record of each file. Registry to send back the original records to Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Jammu.