CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(2019) 07 PAT CK 0195

M/S Hotel Yuvraj Delux vs Employees State Insurance Corporation And Ors

Patna High Court · Decided on 11 July 2019

HON’BLE JUDGES
Shivaji Pandey, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 13243 Of 2018
Download PDFAsk AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 327 words

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Employees State Insurance Corporation.

In this case, a short but important question has been raised that Employees State Insurance Corporation in a proceeding under Section 45-A without giving notice and proper hearing, has passed order against the petitioner.

The plea has been taken by the Employees State Insurance Corporation that the petitioner has a forum of appeal under Section 45-AA of the E.S.I. Act as well as he can challenge the order under Section 75 of the E.S.I. Act.

The law in this line is very much settled in the case of Whirlpool Corporation. v. Registrar of Trade Marks reported in 1998 (8) SCC 1, wherein it has been held that in the event any action is taken without giving any notice to the person, the concerned person instead of exhausting the remedy of appeal can make a complain before the Writ Court and the Writ Court will be at liberty to consider the same and take decision in accordance with law.

In the present case, the assessment has been made without giving proper notice to the petitioner. Accordingly, the order dated 20.05.2016 passed by the Deputy Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation, as well as the order dated 06.06.2018 passed by the Assistant Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation (Recovery Officer), are quashed. The matter is remanded back to the Deputy Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation, to decide the case on its merit. This Court directs the petitioner to remain present before the Deputy Director on 31.07.2019 along with all his records connecting the period involved in the present case and the Deputy Director will decide the case after giving hearing to the present petitioner. If the petitioner failed to appear before the Deputy Director, in such circumstance, the Deputy Director will be at liberty to take decision in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition is allowed to the above extent.