New DelhiThe Supreme Court has held that the activities of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) are of commercial nature and can be called a “shop” for the purpose of attracting the provisions of the Employees’ State Insurance Act.
The top court observed that the ESI Act is a welfare law enacted by the Center and a narrow meaning should not be attached to the words used in the Act as it provides insurance to the employees of the covered establishments against various risks to their life, health and well being. Wants to – is and blames the employer.
A bench of Justices MR Shah and PS Narasimha observed that no error has been committed by the ESI Court and/or the High Court in considering and considering the BCCI as a ‘shop’ for implementing the ESI Act.
“Considering the systematic activities being carried out by BCCI, selling tickets for cricket matches, providing entertainment, providing services for a price, receiving income from international tours and the Indian Premier League, ESI Court, As at the same time the High Court has rightly concluded that BCCI is carrying on systematic economic commercial activities and hence, BCCI can be called a ‘shop’ for the purpose of attracting the provisions of the ESI Act,” the bench said.
The top court was dealing with the question whether BCCI can be called a ‘shop’ as per the notification dated September 18, 1978, and whether the provisions of the ESI Act would be applicable to BCCI or not.
The Bombay High Court had held that BCCI comes within the meaning of ‘shop’ in terms of 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.
Top court said word shop? It should not be understood and interpreted in its traditional sense as it would not serve the purpose of the ESI Act.
It said that a broad meaning can be assigned to the word shop? For the purposes of the ESI Act.
The apex court, on behalf of the BCCI, said that its prime activity is to promote cricket/sports and hence it should not be brought within the definition of ‘shop’ for the purpose of implementing the ESI Act, it has no substance.
“It also needs to be noted that while doing so, the High Court has also taken into account the relevant clauses of the Memorandum of Association of the BCCI to arrive at the conclusion that the activities of the BCCI may be called systematic commercial tickets etc. Activities providing entertainment by selling.The Memorandum of Association needs to be considered holistically.
“In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, we do not see any reason to interfere with the judgment and order passed by the High Court as well as the ESI Court. Thus, we are fully abided by the view taken by them. Agree. High Court. The special leave petitions are accordingly dismissed,” the bench said.