Chandrakant Nikam v. Municipal Corporation of Ahmedabad
Rule established
ESI Act applies to casual and temporary workers within covered establishment premises. Casual employment does not exempt from coverage.
Facts
- Workers employed on casual/temporary basis at Municipal Corporation of Ahmedabad
- Corporation was a covered establishment under the ESI Act
- Casual workers denied ESI benefits on the ground they were not "regular" employees
- Workers claimed coverage under Section 2(9)
Issue
- Whether casual and temporary workers employed within a covered establishment are "employees" entitled to ESI coverage.
Held
- ESI Act applies to all workers within a covered establishment
- Casual or temporary nature of employment does not exempt from coverage
- Section 2(9) definition of "employee" does not require permanent or regular status
- Coverage depends on the establishment, not the employment type
Ratio Decidendi
The ESI Act covers all workers (casual, temporary, or regular) employed within a covered establishment. The character of the employment relationship does not determine ESI coverage.
How to use it in an exam
- Authority for ESI coverage of casual/temporary workers
- Key line: "In Chandrakant Nikam (2002), the Supreme Court held that the ESI Act applies to casual and temporary workers within covered establishments, as coverage depends on the establishment, not the nature of employment."
Source
Source: (2002) 2 SCC 542; verified from chapter content
This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.