{"id":7228,"date":"2009-12-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-12-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009"},"modified":"2015-06-25T21:58:13","modified_gmt":"2015-06-25T16:28:13","slug":"employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009","title":{"rendered":"Employees&#8217; State Insurance &#8230; vs Swastika Electric &amp; Scientific &#8230; on 3 December, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Employees&#8217; State Insurance &#8230; vs Swastika Electric &amp; Scientific &#8230; on 3 December, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>           FAO No. 2486 of 2009                                    -1-\n\n\n               In the High Court of Punjab &amp; Haryana at Chandigarh\n\n                                                   FAO No. 2486 of 2009 (O&amp;M)\n\n                                                  Date of decision : 3.12.2009\n\nEmployees' State Insurance Corporation and another               ..... Appellants\n                                       vs\nSwastika Electric &amp; Scientific Works (R) and another             ..... Respondents<\/pre>\n<pre>Coram:        Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal\n\n\nPresent:      Mr. Vikas Suri, Advocate, for the appellants.\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>              Mr. R. K. Gupta, Advocate, for the respondents.\n<\/p>\n<p>Rajesh Bindal J.\n<\/p>\n<p>              Employees&#8217; State Insurance Corporation is in appeal against the<br \/>\nimpugned order passed by the Employees&#8217; Insurance court, Ambala, in a petition<br \/>\nfiled by the respondent under Section 75 of the Employees State Insurance Act,<br \/>\n1948 (for short, &#8220;the Act&#8221;).\n<\/p>\n<p>              Considering the fact that learned counsel for the appellants has raised<br \/>\na very brief contention regarding the legal issue involved in the present appeal, I<br \/>\ndo not deem it to notice the facts of the case in detail. It is suffice to notice that in<br \/>\nthe petition filed by the respondents before the court below recovery notice dated<br \/>\n23.7.2000 and notices issued subsequent thereto were under challenge on various<br \/>\ngrounds raised therein including that the claim made by the appellants was time<br \/>\nbarred. The learned court below while referring to the provisions of Section 77 of<br \/>\nthe Act opined that no recovery could be effected after the same is beyond the<br \/>\nperiod of five years and accordingly the impugned notices were set aside. Other<br \/>\nissues on merits were not gone into.\n<\/p>\n<p>              Learned counsel for the appellants referred to a judgment of Hon&#8217;ble<br \/>\nthe Supreme Court in ESI Corpn. vs C.C. Santha Kumar (2007) 1 Supreme Court<br \/>\nCases 584, to submit that issue regarding limitation for effecting recovery under<br \/>\nthe Act was considered by Hon&#8217;ble the Supreme Court in the aforesaid judgment<br \/>\nand it was opined that there is no period of limitation as such.\n<\/p>\n<p>              In view of the aforesaid facts, the submission is that the order of the<br \/>\nlearned court below deserves to be set aside and the matter remitted back for fresh<br \/>\nconsideration on merits of the controversy which has not been dealt with.\n<\/p>\n<p>              Learned counsel for the respondents could not dispute the<br \/>\nproposition of law laid down by Hon&#8217;ble the Supreme Court in the aforesaid<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">            FAO No. 2486 of 2009                                    -2-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>judgment and referred to by the learned counsel for the appellants. However, he<br \/>\nsubmitted that if the matter is remitted back to the learned court below all the<br \/>\nissues be left open.\n<\/p>\n<p>              Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper-book.<br \/>\n              In ESI Corpn.&#8217;s case (supra), Hon&#8217;ble the Supreme Court considered<br \/>\ntwo legal issues. The same have been extracted in paras 11 and 12 of the judgment<br \/>\nwhich are as under:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>                              &#8220;11.    In the present case, the controversy centres on<br \/>\n                       the proviso to clause (b) of Section 77 (1-A). The crucial<br \/>\n                       question is, &#8220;Does the proviso to Clause (b) of Section 77<br \/>\n                       (1A) fix the limit of time, in which the Corporation can make<br \/>\n                       a claim from the employer, on the basis of the orders passed<br \/>\n                       under Section 45?&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                              12.     Section 45-A is a part of Chapter IV. Section 77<br \/>\n                       (1-A) (b) proviso is contained in Chapter VI. The question is<br \/>\n                       whether there is any connecting link between Chapter IV and<br \/>\n                       Chapter VI.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>              The relevant paragraphs where the questions were considered are<br \/>\nextracted below:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>                              &#8220;26. On a plain reading of Sections 45A and 45B in<br \/>\n                       Chapter IV and 75 and 77 in Chapter VI of the Act, as<br \/>\n                       indicated above, there cannot be any doubt that the area and<br \/>\n                       the scope and ambit of Sections 45A and 75 are quite<br \/>\n                       different.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                              27. If the period of limitation, prescribed under proviso\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                       (b) of Section 77(1A) is read into the provisions of Section<br \/>\n                       45A, it would defeat the very purpose of enacting Sections<br \/>\n                       45A and 45B. The prescription of limitation under Section 77<br \/>\n                       (IA)(b) of the Act has not been made applicable to the<br \/>\n                       adjudication   proceedings    under    Section    45A   by the<br \/>\n                       legislature, since such a restriction would restrict the right of<br \/>\n                       the Corporation to determine the claims under Section 45A<br \/>\n                       and the right of recovery under Section 45B and, further, it<br \/>\n                       would give a benefit to an unscrupulous employer.           The<br \/>\n                       period of five years, fixed under Regulation 32(2) of the<br \/>\n                       Regulations, is with regard to maintenance of registers of<br \/>\n                       workmen and the same cannot take away the right of the<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\"> FAO No. 2486 of 2009                                -3-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>          Corporation to adjudicate, determine and fix the liability of<br \/>\n          the employer under Section 45A of the Act, in respect of the<br \/>\n          claim other than those found in the register of workmen,<br \/>\n          maintained and filed in terms of the Regulations.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                  28. What Section 75(2) empowers is not only the<br \/>\n          recovery of the amounts due to the Corporation from the<br \/>\n          employer by recourse to the E.S.I. Court, but also the<br \/>\n          settlement of the dispute of a claim by the corporation against<br \/>\n          the employer. While this is so, there is no impediment for the<br \/>\n          Corporation also to apply to the E.S.I. Court to determine a<br \/>\n          dispute against an employer where it is satisfied that such a<br \/>\n          dispute exists. If there is no dispute in the determination<br \/>\n          either under Section 45A(1) or under Section 68, the<br \/>\n          Corporation can straightway go for recovery of the arrears.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                  29. Section 77 of the Act relates to commencement of<br \/>\n          proceedings before the E.S.I. Court. The proviso to sub-<br \/>\n          section (1-A) (b) of Section 77 of the Act cannot<br \/>\n          independently give any meaning without reference to the<br \/>\n          main provision, namely, Section 77 of the Act. Therefore, the<br \/>\n          proviso to Clause (b) of Section 77(1A) of the Act, fixing the<br \/>\n          period of five years for the claim made by the Corporation,<br \/>\n          will apply only in respect of claim made by the Corporation<br \/>\n          before the E.S.I. Court and to no other proceedings.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                  30. The Legislature has provided for a special remedy<br \/>\n          to deal with special cases. The determination of the claim is<br \/>\n          left to the Corporation, which is based on the information<br \/>\n          available to it. It shows whether information is sufficient or<br \/>\n          not or the Corporation is able to get information from the<br \/>\n          employer or not, on the available records, the Corporation<br \/>\n          could determine the arrears. So, the non-availability of the<br \/>\n          records after five years, as per the Regulations, would not<br \/>\n          debar the Corporation to determine the amount of arrears.<br \/>\n          Therefore, if the provisions of Section 45A are read with<br \/>\n          Section 45B of the Act, then, the determination made by the<br \/>\n          Corporation is concerned. It may not be final so far as the<br \/>\n          employer is concerned, if he chooses to challenge it by filing<br \/>\n          an application under Section 75 of the Act. If the employer<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">             FAO No. 2486 of 2009                               -4-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>                      fails to challenge the said determination under Section 75 of<br \/>\n                      the Act before the Court, then the determination under<br \/>\n                      Section 45A becomes final against the employer as well. As<br \/>\n                      such, there is no hurdle for recovery of the amount<br \/>\n                      determined under Section 45B of the Act, by invoking the<br \/>\n                      mode of recovery, as contemplated in Sections 45C to 45-I.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>              Considering the aforesaid authoritative annunciation of law wherein<br \/>\nview of Full Bench of Kerala High Court is not found correct and that of Madras<br \/>\nHigh Court was approved, I have no option but to set aside the impugned order<br \/>\npassed by the court below. Ordered accordingly. However, considering the fact<br \/>\nthat claim made by the respondents has not been considered by the learned court<br \/>\nbelow on any of other grounds raised by them, I deem it appropriate to remit the<br \/>\nmatter back for fresh consideration of the issues on merits except on the question<br \/>\nof limitation which stand settled by Hon&#8217;ble the Supreme Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>              The parties through their counsels are directed to appear before the<br \/>\ncourt below on 16.1.2010 for further proceedings.\n<\/p>\n<pre>3.12.2009                                                ( Rajesh Bindal)\nvs                                                             Judge\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Punjab-Haryana High Court Employees&#8217; State Insurance &#8230; vs Swastika Electric &amp; Scientific &#8230; on 3 December, 2009 FAO No. 2486 of 2009 -1- In the High Court of Punjab &amp; Haryana at Chandigarh FAO No. 2486 of 2009 (O&amp;M) Date of decision : 3.12.2009 Employees&#8217; State Insurance Corporation and another &#8230;.. Appellants vs Swastika Electric [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7228","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Employees&#039; State Insurance ... vs Swastika Electric &amp; Scientific ... on 3 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Employees&#039; State Insurance ... vs Swastika Electric &amp; Scientific ... on 3 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-12-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-06-25T16:28:13+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Employees&#8217; State Insurance &#8230; vs Swastika Electric &amp; Scientific &#8230; on 3 December, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-12-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-06-25T16:28:13+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1234,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009\",\"name\":\"Employees' State Insurance ... vs Swastika Electric &amp; Scientific ... on 3 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-12-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-06-25T16:28:13+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Employees&#8217; State Insurance &#8230; vs Swastika Electric &amp; Scientific &#8230; on 3 December, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Employees' State Insurance ... vs Swastika Electric &amp; Scientific ... on 3 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Employees' State Insurance ... vs Swastika Electric &amp; Scientific ... on 3 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-12-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-06-25T16:28:13+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Employees&#8217; State Insurance &#8230; vs Swastika Electric &amp; Scientific &#8230; on 3 December, 2009","datePublished":"2009-12-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-06-25T16:28:13+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009"},"wordCount":1234,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009","name":"Employees' State Insurance ... vs Swastika Electric &amp; Scientific ... on 3 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-12-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-06-25T16:28:13+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/employees-state-insurance-vs-swastika-electric-scientific-on-3-december-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Employees&#8217; State Insurance &#8230; vs Swastika Electric &amp; Scientific &#8230; on 3 December, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7228","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7228"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7228\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7228"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7228"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7228"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}