The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.24329 of 2024 M/s. S.K. Singh & Construction, RKL …. Petitioner Mr. S. Mishra, Advocate -versus- Asst. Director-cum-Recovery Officer, ESI Corp., Jharsuguda …. Opposite Party Mr. A.P. Ray, Adv. CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
Decision
ORDER 04.10.2024 Order No. 02. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. The Writ Petition has been preferred with the following prayers: “Prayer It is, in the circumstances, humbly prayed that your Lordship may graciously be pleased to admit the writ petition, issue notice to the Opp. Party to show cause as to why this writ petition shall not be allowed and if the Opp. Party does not show cause or shows insufficient or false cause then after hearing the counsel for the parties be pleased to allow the writ petition by quashing Annexure-3 and direct the Opp. Party to revoke/withdraw the other Garnishee orders or attachment orders if any, to enable the petitioner to operate its Bank accounts in different banks to run its business and be further pleased to pass Page 1 of 6 any other or further order/orders as deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. And for the said out of kindness the petitioner shall as in duty bound every pray”. (Emphasis supplied) 3. The Petitioner firm had earlier approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.20551 of 2024, which stood disposed of vide order dated 28.08.2024. Paragraph Nos.4 to 8 of the said order, being relevant, are extracted below: concerned Court on “ 4. The sole grievance of the Petitioner is that though it has already moved before the E.I. Court challenging the order dated 05.02.2020 passed by the Authority concerned in terms of the Section 75(1)(g) of the E.S.I. Act, 1948, and the matter is sub-judice, after getting notice from the limitation on the Garnishee Order dated 09.08.2024, 12.08.2024 under Section 45G of the E.S.I. Act, 1948 has been issued by the Recovery Officer the Managing Director/Principal directing Officer, Steel Authority of India, Rourkela Plant, it being the principal employer, for recovery of the amount as ordered in the 45A proceeding. 5. Admittedly, the CMA No.03 of 2024 under Section 75(1)(g) of the Act, 1948 is now pending before the 1st Additional District/Sessions Judge-Cum-EI Court Rourkela challenging the order passed by the Authority concerned under Section 45-A of the Act, 1948. 6. It is the case of the Petitioner that in the said pending application, as separate application has been filed under Section 75 (2B) of the Act, 1948 for waiving out the statutory deposit amount on the Page 2 of 6 ground that the Opposite Party-Corporation has already realized a sum of Rs.12,61,739/- from the bank account of the Petitioner by virtue of the Garnishee Order, which is more than the 50% of the amount to be deposited in a proceeding initiated under Section 75 of the Act, 1948, as the determined amount in the 45A proceeding is Rs.20,32,924/- 7. In view of the said admitted facts and documents on record, on consent of the learned Counsel for the parties the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the stage of admission. The Opposite Parties-Corporation so also the Recovery Officer are directed not to take any coercive action against the Petitioner pursuant to order dated 05.02.2020 passed under Section 45-A of the Act, 1948, so also the Garnishee Order dated 12.08.2024, issued under Section 45G of the Act, 1948, as the said issue regarding legality of order dated 05.02.2020 is now subjudice in CMA No.3 of 2024 before the Court of 1st Additional District/Sessions Judge-Cum-E.I. Court, Rourkela and the interim applications for condonation of delay so also exemption from deposit of statutory amount are still pending for consideration. 8. It is made clear that the interim protection granted by this Court shall remain in force till disposal of such interim applications, as detailed above, by the E.I. Court.” (Emphasis supplied) Page 3 of 6 4. Since one of the allegations made in the Writ Petition is despite order passed in W.P.(C) No.20551 of 2024 the bank account of the Petitioner was attached and money was taken away by the Corporation from the bank account of the Petitioner, pursuant to order dated 01.10.2024 of this Court, Mr. Ray, learned Counsel for the Opposite Party-Corporation files in the Court the photocopy of letter dated 20.09.2024 so also computer generated copy of letter dated 01.10.2024 sent through mail, addressed to him by the Asst. Director (Recovery), the contents of which are extracted below: “No.85000127180001001-RR Date:20.09.2024 To, The Brach Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, Jharsuguda Branch, 1st Floor Shree Complex Main Road Opp. Goods Shed, Jharsuguda-768201. Payment in respect of M/s. S.K. Singh & Sub - Construction bearing Account No.069102000001448, IFSC-IOBA0000691 & PAN No. AYRTS5074M-regd. Sir, With reference to above cited subject, please find the Cheque No.826789 dated 20.09.2024 amounting Rs.1,59,000.00 (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Nine Thousand Only) which may be credited the account of M/s S.K. Singh & into Construction, PAN No.AYRTS5074M, Account No.069102000001448, IFSC-IOBA0000691. Page 4 of 6 Further, it is also requested that no further remittance from aforementioned account may be credited into ESI Fund Account No.1 till further intimation. Receipt of the letter may kindly acknowledge. Signed by Abhishek Kumar Dated:20.09.2024 Asst. Director (Recovery)” “No.85000127180001001-RR Dated:01.10.2024 To The Shri A.P Roy, Advocate, High Court Cuttack Sub-Hon’ble High Court, Cuttack order in r/o M/s S.K. Singh & Construction. Sir, As per our telephone discussion, I have to inform you that no other coercive action is taken against M/s. S.K. Singh & Construction Company after the date of order of Hon’ble High Court, Cuttack i.e. 28.8.2024 except the Indian Overseas Bank account attachment of M/s. S.K. Singh & Construction Company on 04.09.2024. Copies of all other coercive actions taken by this office against M/s S.K. Singh & Construction Company are enclosed for your kind reference. With regard Abhishek Kumar Date:01.10.2024 Asst. Director (Recovery)” (Emphasis supplied) 5. Learned Counsel for the Corporation submits, inadvertently the account of the Petitioner Establishment was attached and money was taken Page 5 of 6 away from the bank. However, realizing the said mistake, immediately thereafter steps were taken to refund the attached money to the concerned bank. 6. In view of the admitted facts as detailed above, on consent of the parties, the Writ Petition stands disposed of at the stage of admission with an observation that no further coercive action shall be taken against the Petitioner Establishment in terms of order dated 28.08.2024 passed in W.P.(C) No.20551 of 2024, till disposal of its application pending before the Additional District/Sessions Judge- Cum-EI Court, Rourkela. The Garnishee/Attachment order, if any, issued in the meantime by the Corporation, shall not be given effect to by the concerned Banks so also Rourkela Steel Plant, as has been detailed in the para-9 of the Writ Petition, until passing of appropriate order by the EI Court. 7. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application as per rules. JUDGE (S.K. MISHRA) Kanhu Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: KANHU BEHERA Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 05-Oct-2024 16:25:25 Page 6 of 6