http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3  

PETITIONER: OSMANIA UNIVERSITY

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: REGIONAL DIRECTOR, EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION, AN

DATE OF JUDGMENT08/10/1985

BENCH: ERADI, V. BALAKRISHNA (J) BENCH: ERADI, V. BALAKRISHNA (J) REDDY, O. CHINNAPPA (J) KHALID, V. (J)

CITATION:  1986 AIR  466            1985 SCR  Supl. (3) 589  1985 SCC  (4) 514        1985 SCALE  (2)696

ACT:      Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 Sections 1 (4) and 2(12).      Publications  and  Press  Department  of  University  - Running printing  press and printing of text books, journals and stationery  items for  University -  Employees  of  such Department whether eligible for benefits of ESI Act.      Words & Phrases      ‘Factory’-  ’Manufacturing   process’-  Meaning   of  - Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948, Section 2(12).

HEADNOTE:      The Department of Publications and Press of the Osmania University (Appellant) runs printing presses, where the work of printing of text books, journals and magazines as well as various items  of stationery  such  as  admission  forms  to colleges, hostels  and examinations,  hall  tickets,  answer books etc. for the University are printed. about 100 persons are employed in connection with the said activity.      On  the  question  :  whether  the  provisions  of  the Employees’ State  Insurance  Act,  1948  are  applicable  in respect of  the  employees  working  in  the  Department  of Publication and  Presses, a Division Bench of the High Court answered the  question in  the affirmative,  set  aside  the judgment of  a Single Judge, and dismissed the Writ Petition of the University.      Dismissing the Appeal of the University, this Court, ^      HELD: The  Department of  Publications and Press of the University  is  engaged  in  carrying  on  a  ’manufacturing process’ in  the printing of text-books, Journals, forms and other items of 590 stationery. It is a ’factory’ within the meaning of the said expression as  defined in  section 2(12)  of the  Employees’ State Insurance  Act,  1948.  The  employees  are  therefore eligible for the benefits under the said Act. [592 A]

JUDGMENT:

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3  

    CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1079 of 1973.      From the  Judgment and  Order dated  16.11.1972 of  the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Writ Appeal No. 345 of 1972.      B.R.L. Iyengar,  G.N. Rao,  T.C. Gupta  and Attar Singh for the Appellant.      M.S. Gujral,  C.V. Subba  Rao,  R.N.  Poddar  and  T.C. Sharma for the Respondents.      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by      BALAKRISHNA ERADI,  J. : The short question that arises for our  determination in  this appeal, which has been filed on the  basis of  a certificate granted by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh  is whether  the provisions of the Employees’ State Insurance  Act, 1948  are applicable in respect of the employees working  in the  Department  of  Publications  and Press of  the Osmania  University. A  Division Bench  of the High Court has answered the said question in the affirmative differing from  the contrary  view expressed  by  a  learned Single Judge,  who had  allowed a Writ Petition filed by the University.  In  the  light  of  the  said  conclusion,  the Division Bench  set aside the judgment of the learned Single Judge and  dismissed the  Writ Petition. Under clause (4) of Section 1  of the  Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short ‘the  act’) the  Act will  apply  to  all  ’factories’ including factories  belonging to  the Government other than seasonal  factories.   The  expression  "factory"  has  been defined in Section 2(12) of the Act in the following terms:-           2(12) "factory"  means any  premises including the           precincts thereof  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           with 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; 591           "seasonal  factory"   means  a  factory  which  is           exclusively  engaged   in  one   or  more  of  the           following manufacturing  processes, namely  cotton           ginning, cotton or jute pressing, decortication of           groundnuts, the  manufacture  of  coffee,  indigo,           lac, rubber,  sugar (including  gur) or tea or any           manufacturing process  which is  incidental to  or           connected with any of the aforesaid processes;           (and includes  a factory  which is  engaged for  a           period not exceeding seven months in a year -           (a)  in  any  process  of  blending,  packing,  or           repacking of tea or coffee; or           (b) in  such other  manufacturing process  as  the           Central Government  may, by  notification  in  the           Official Gazette specify;)           The expression "manufacturing process" and ’power"           shall have  the meaning  respectively assigned  to           them in the Factories Act, 1948 (63 of 1948)."      Clause (k)  of Section  2 of  the Factories Act defines the expression  ’Manufacturing process’. For the purposes of this case  we need  refer to only sub-clause (i) of the said definition clause. that sub-clause states that Manufacturing Process means  any process for "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".      In the connected appeal - C.A. No. 204 of 1973 filed by

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3  

the same  appellant, we had occasion to consider whether the Department of  Publications and  Press run by the University is liable  for coverage under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 together with Schemes and Notifications.  In our  judgment in  that appeal we have taken the  view that  the  said  department  is  engaged  in carrying on  a ’manufacturing  process’ in  the printing  of text books,  journals, forms  and other items of stationery. The  definition  of  "manufacturing  process"  contained  in Section  2(l-c)   of  the  Employees’  Provident  Funds  and Miscellaneous Provisions  Act is  identical in  all respects with that contained in Section 2(k)(i) of the Factories Act. 592      In the light of the aforesaid conclusion recorded by us in C.A.  No. 204 of 1973 it must be held that the department in question  is a  ’factory’ within  the meaning of the said expression as  defined in  Section 2  (12) of  the Act.  The judgment under  appeal does  not, therefore,  call  for  any interference.      This appeal is accordingly dismissed with costs. N.V.K.                                      Appeal dismissed 593