MR. GIRISHKUNDAPUR v. UNION OF INDIA
Case at a glance
- Bench
- JYOTI MULIMANI
- Neutral citation
- 2024:KHC:45506
Outcome
Dismissed
Resultantly, the Writ Petition is dismissed
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
- ESI Act, 1948
- AA of the ESI Act
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25
Judgment
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 1029 OF 2023 (L-ESI) BETWEEN: MR. GIRISHKUNDAPUR S/O ANNUDEVADIGA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, SHABHARI HOUSE, J.L.B.ROAD, VODERHOBLI, KUNDAPURA, UDUPI-576 201. (PROPRIETOR OF M/S. G.K.CONSTRUCTIONS). (BY SRI. ASHWIN., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. AKASH.B.SHETTY., ADVOCATE) AND:
UNION OF INDIA …PETITIONER MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT, EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION, GOVT. OF INDIA, SHRAM SHAKTI BHAWAN, RAFI MARG, NEW DELHI-110 001. PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka
DEPUTY DIRECTOR, EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION, SUB-REGIONAL OFFICE, 1ST FLOOR, CITY POINT, KODIALBAIL, MANGALORE-575 003. (BY SMT. PRIYANKA.S.BHAT., CGC FOR R1; SMT. VARSHINI., ADVOCATE FOR SMT. GEETHADEVI.M.P., ADVOCATE FOR R2) …RESPONDENTS - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:45506 WP No. 1029 of 2023 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri. Ashwin., counsel on behalf of Sri. Akash B.Shetty., for the petitioner and Smt. Varshini., counsel on behalf of Smt. Geetha Devi.M.P., for respondent No.2 have appeared in person.
2. The order dated:01.07.2022 passed by the ESI Corporation under Section 45-A of the ESI Act, 1948 is called into question in this Writ Petition on several grounds as setout in the Memorandum of Writ Petition.
Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care.
Counsel the petitioner in presenting his arguments strenuously urged that before passing the order, a reasonable opportunity of being heard has not been accorded to the petitioner. Counsel therefore, submits that the order is - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:45506 WP No. 1029 of 2023 opposed to the principles of natural justice. Hence, an appropriate order may be passed. By way of reply to this contention, counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the petitioner has not availed the alternate statutory remedy. Counsel therefore, submits that the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed. The oral submission made by counsel for the respective parties is placed on record.
The principal ground on which this Court is asked to quash the impugned order is that the same is opposed to the principles of natural justice. However, a perusal of Section 45AA of the ESI Act reflects that, if an employer is not satisfied with the order passed under Section 45A, he may prefer an appeal before the Appellate Authority. In the present case, the petitioner has not availed the alternate statutory remedy and has hurriedly filed the Writ Petition. Hence, I decline to exercise power under the writ jurisdiction. - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:45506 WP No. 1029 of 2023
Operative part
Resultantly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Resultantly, the Writ Petition is dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 226, 227; ESI Act, 1948; AA of the ESI Act.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.