High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or orders direction or directions to quash the proceedings 2nd Respondent in No. 52Q13787-101 dated 16-1-2009 and to issue a consequential direction to the 1st respondent not to proceed against the petitioner for recovery of the alleged dues of contributions pertaining to the years '1994 to 1996 and the interest thereon except by resorting to the due process under Section 75(2) of'the ESI Act, 1948 as per the law laid down by the APEX Court in 2007 (1) SCC page 584 l.A. NO: 1 OF 200 9(WP MP. NO: 330 I OF 2009) Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to proceed further in pursuance to the Demand Notice of the 2nd Respondent in No. 52e/3787-10r dated 16-1-2009 pending disposal of the wot petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt. VEDULA SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondents: SRI B. G. RAVINDER REDDY The Court made the following: ORDER Y I ,,/ MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION No.2579 of 2OO9 ORDER: Heard Sri Vedula Srinivas, Iearned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri B.G.Ravinder Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. The petitioner aoor6ached the Court seekinq praver as under: "...to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Orders Direction or Directions to quash the proceedings of the 2nd Respondent in No. 52Q/3787-LO1 dated 16-12-2009 and to issue a consequential direction to the 1't Respondent not to proceed against the petitioner for recovery of the alleged dues of contributions pertaining to the years 1994 to 1996 and the interest thereon except by resorting to the due process Under Section 75(2)(a) of the ESI Act, 1948 as per the law laid down by the APEX Court in 2007 (L) SCC page 584 and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in,.the circumstances of the ca se. "

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner is a public limited company that was engaged in selling biscuits, which were manufactured on a job-work basis at other units. 2 SN, J wP 2579 2009 Due to strained industrial relations, the manufacturing unit was locked out, and eventually stopped production in the year, 1996. The petitioner informed the ESI authorities about the stoppage of activities and paid all ESI arrears, including those related to its depots and branches in the year 2006. However, respondent No.2 issued a recovery notice dated 16.01.2009, demanding an amount of Rs.4,46,030/- towards arrears and interest. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

4. This Co rt, vide its order dated L2.O2.2009in W.P.M.P.No.33 08 of 2OO 9, passed interirn orders in favou r of the Detitioner o bservinq as u nder: "Though the matter is taken up for hearing after passing it over for some time, none appeared for the respo ndent. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. There shall be interim direction as prayed for, subject to the condition that the petitioner deposits half of the amount demanded by the respondent- corporation by the impugned notice dated 16.01.2009 within a period of three weeks." 5, It is represented by the learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents that the subject issue in the present Writ petition is squarely covered by the order of this / 3 SN, J wP 2579 2009 Court dated t4.02.202O passed in W.P.No.2572 of 2009 and hence, the present writ petition could be disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order. I t

6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf oF the petitioner does not dispute the said submission made on behalf of the learned standing counsel and the learned counsel fufther submits that the petitioner is willing to approach the competent ESI Court within a reasonable period putting forth the petitioner's grievance as put-forth by the petitioner in the present writ petition and seek appropriate relief before the appropriate forum i.e., competent ESI Court. Takinq into consideration:

7. a) The facts and circumstances of the case, b) The submissions made by both the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents and, c) In view of the submission made by the l'eirned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner would approach the competent ESI Court within a reasonable period, I I 4 SN, J wP 2579 2009 The Writ Petition is disposed directing the petitioner to approach the competent ESf Court within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The respondents are directed not to insist for enforcement of the impugned order dated 16.01.2009 issued by the respondent No.2 herein for a period of two (O2) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order to enable the petitioner to approach the Competent ESI Court. However, there shall be no order as to costs. The miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed To, //TRUE COPY// SD/- A.V.S. PRASAD NT REGISTRAR ASSI ECTION OFFICER -r-\ Road, Hyderabad

1. The Joint Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation, 5-9-23, Hill Fort 2. The Recovery Officer, Employees State lnsurance Corporation, 5-9-23, Hill 3. One CC to SRl. VEDULA SRINIVAS Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to SRl. B. G. RAVINDER REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies Fort Road, Hyderabad. BIV H!GH COURT DATED:2510212025 CC TODAY ORDER WP.No.2579 of 2009 He ST4 0 E ilAn 2tp5 2 .* .D;€ * ,r/ i/ DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ;