Noorul H.H.H. Petrol Pump & ANR Vs. Dy. Director, E.S.I. Corporation 
INSC 1314 (29 July 2009)
COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 5840 OF 2004 M/S. QAZI
NOORUL H.H.H. PETROL PUMP &ANR Appellant (s) VERSUS DY. DIRECTOR, E.S.I.
CORPORATION Respondent(s) (With appln(s) for exemption from filing
O.T.,directions and prayer for interim relief and office report )) Date:
29/07/2009 This Appeal was called on for hearing today.
MR. JUSTICE MARKANDEY KATJU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. DATTU For Appellant(s) Mr.
Dinesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv.
Prateek Dwivedi, Adv.
Vandana Mishra, Adv.
Manish Kumar, Adv.
Ashutosh Kr. Sharma, Adv.for Mr. Shail Kumar Dwivedi,Adv.
Mr. V.J. Francis,Adv.
hearing counsel the Court made the following ORDER The appeal is dismissed in
terms of the Reportable signed order.
Kr. Chawla) ( Indu Satija) Court Master Court Master [Reportable Signed Order is
placed on the File] REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE
JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5840 OF 2004 M/s. Qazi Noorul H.H.H.
Pump & Another ..Appellants versus Dy.Director, ESI Corporation
..Respondent ORDER Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the Allahabad High Court
dated 24th January, 2003 passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.53564 of 2002.
By the impugned judgment, the High Court has dismissed the writ petition filed
by the appellant herein.
appellant is running a petrol pump (public retail outlet) for dispensing
petrol/diesel. He filed the aforesaid Writ Petition No. 53564 of 2002 in the
High Court of Allahabad challenging an order dated 17th October, 2002 issued by
the Deputy Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Regional Office,
Kanpur directing the appellant to make contribution under the Employees' State
Insurance Act, 1948 (for short 'the Act') from August, 1993 to May, -2- 2000
and interest on the aforesaid amount failing which recovery shall be issued
under Sections 45-C and 45-G of the Act.
question in this case is whether the appellant is covered by the Act. Section
1(4) of the Act states that the Act, in the first instance, shall apply to all
factories. Section 2(12) of the Act provides:
"factory" means any premises including the precincts thereof-- (a)
whereon ten 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 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;)"
expressions "manufacturing process" as well as "power" used
in the Act have been given the same meaning as in the Factories Act, 1948, vide Sections 2(14-AA) and Section 2(15-C) of the Act.
2(k) of the Factories
Act, 1948 defines -3- "manufacturing
process" as follows:
"manufacturing process" means process for-- (i) making, altering,
repairing, ornamenting, finishing, packing, oiling, washing, cleaning, breaking
up, demolishing, or otherwise treating or adapting any article or substance
with a view to its use, sale, transport, delivery or disposal, or (ii)pumping
oil, water, sewage or any other substance, or (iii)generating, transforming or
transmitting power, or (iv)composing types for printing, printing by letter
press, lithography, photogravure or other similar process or book binding;
reconstructing, repairing, refitting, finishing or breaking up ships or
vessels; or (vi)preserving or storing any article in cold storage;"
of the aforesaid provision shows that pumping oil is also a manufacturing
connection, it may be stated that the words "manufacturing process"
in different statutes have different meanings. For instance, in the Central
Excise Act, 1944, the word "manufacture" means bringing into
existence a different commodity, though this is not the definition of
"manufacturing process" in the Factories Act, 1948.
We cannot apply the definition of "manufacturing process" in one
Statute to another Statute.
Section 2(k), sub-clause (ii) of the Factories Act, 1948
states that pumping oil is a manufacturing process. Admittedly, the appellant
does the work of pumping oil. When we go to a Petrol Pump for getting petrol or
diesel, the petrol or diesel is in a tank and it does not on its own flow from
the tank to the pipe and thereafter into the vehicle, but only by means of a
pump by using power.
counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that we should see the object
and intention of the Statute. It is well settled that once the Statute is
clear, the literal Rule of Interpretation applies, and there is no need to go
into the object and intention of the Statute (vide article entitled 'A Note on
Interpretation of Statutes' by Markandey Katju, J., published in the Journal
Section of AIR 2007 SC page 22). In the present case, Section 2(14-AA) of the
Act states that "manufacturing process" shall have the meaning
assigned to it in the Factories
Act, 1948. In the Factories Act, 1948, Section 2(k) of the Act includes pumping oil as a
opinion, the only rule of interpretation which applies to the facts of the
present case is the Literal Rule of Interpretation, which means that we should
go simply by -5- the wording of the Statute and nothing else and there is no
scope for applying any other Rule of Interpretation. In our opinion, the
language used in Section 2(k)(ii) of the Factories Act, 1948
is clear. Hence, the Act applies to the appellant and the respondent was right
in issuing notice to the appellant for making contribution and interest thereon
for the period in question.
this appeal is dismissed. No costs. However, we reduce the rate of interest to
10% on the principal amount.
..........................J. [MARKANDEY KATJU]