The activities of the Board of Control for Cricket in India
(BCCI) are commercial in nature and can be termed as a "shop" for the
purposes of attracting the provisions of the Employees State Insurance Act, the
Supreme Court has said.
The top court said ESI Act is welfare legislation enacted by
the Centre and a narrow meaning should not be attached to the words used in the
Act as it seeks to insure the employees of covered establishments against
various risks to their life, health, and well-being and places the charge upon
the employer.
A bench of Justices M R Shah and P S Narasimha said no error
has been committed by the ESI Court and/or the High Court in treating and
considering the BCCI as a "shop" for applicability of the ESI Act.
"Considering the systematic activities being carried out
by the BCCI namely, selling of tickets of cricket matches; providing
entertainment; rendering the services for a price; receiving the income from
international tours and the income from the Indian Premier League, the ESI
Court, as well as the High Court, have rightly concluded that the BCCI is
carrying out systematic economic commercial activities and, therefore, the BCCI
can be said to be 'shop' for the purposes of attracting the provisions of ESI
Act," the bench said.
The top court was dealing with the question of whether the
BCCI can be said to be a "shop" as per the notification dated
September 18, 1978, and if the provisions of the ESI Act shall be applicable to
the BCCI or not.
The Bombay High Court had said that BCCI is covered within
the meaning of "shop" as per notification dated September 18, 1978,
issued by the Government of Maharashtra under the provisions of Section 1(5) of
the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948.
The top court said the term "shop" should not be
understood and interpreted in its traditional sense as the same would not serve
the purpose of the ESI Act.
It said an expansive meaning may be assigned to the word
"shop" for the purposes of the ESI Act.
The apex court said submission on behalf of the BCCI that its
predominant activity is to encourage cricket/sports and, therefore, the same
shall not be brought within the definition of "shop" for the purposes
of applying the ESI Act, has no substance.
"It is also required to be noted that while holding so,
the High Court has also taken into consideration the relevant clauses of the
Memorandum of Association of the BCCI to come to the conclusion that the
activities of the BCCI can be said to be systematic commercial activities
providing entertainment by selling tickets, etc. The Memorandum of Association
as a whole is required to be considered.
"In view of the above and for the reasons stated above,
we see no reason to interfere with the impugned judgement and order passed by
the High Court as well as the ESI Court. As such, we are in complete agreement
with the view taken by the High Court. The special leave petitions stand
dismissed accordingly," the bench said.
………………….