✦ Orissa High Court

M/s. Saikrupa Construction, Jagatsinghpur v. Recovery Officer, Regional

ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 31176 of 2024SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA3 min read

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Key paragraphs

  • Para 66. In view of such submission made by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the Writ Petition stands disposed of giving liberty to the Petitioner to approach the Deputy Director (Revenue) ESI Corporation, Bhubaneswar to supply it the necessary documents, including the order(s), based on…

Judgment

ORDER 20.01.2025 This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. During hearing, Mr. Ghosh, learned Counsel for the

3.

Petitioner prays for withdraw the Writ Petition with liberty to approach the EI Court under Section 75 of the ESI Act,

1948. He files a memo to the said effect in the Court. The same be kept on record.

4.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits, since the Petitioner Establishment is yet to be communicated with a copy of the order passed under Section 45A of the Act,1948, based on which the Garnishee Order was issued, an application has been given to the Assistant Director, Revenue-III, Regional Office on 02.12.2024 to provide it all the relevant supporting documents, which are yet to be supplied to the Petitioner Establishment. Unless the copy of the order passed in the 45A proceeding so also relevant communications allegedly made to the Petitioner are supplied to it within a stipulated period, the Petitioner would be unable to approach the E.I. Court, even if liberty is granted by this Court.

5.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner further submits, liberty also be given to move appropriate application before the EI Court for exempting the Petitioner Establishment from depositing the statutory amount in terms of Section 75(2-B) of the Act, 1948, in view of the fact that entire determined amount in the 45-A proceeding has been recovered from the Petitioner vide the Garnishee Order by attaching the bank account of the Petitioner Establishment.

6.

In view of such submission made by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the Writ Petition stands disposed of giving liberty to the Petitioner to approach the Deputy Director (Revenue) ESI Corporation, Bhubaneswar to supply it the necessary documents, including the order(s), based on which the Garnishee order was issued against the Petitioner, enabling it to approach the EI Court.

7.

As the Petitioner has incorrectly moved before the Assistant Director, Revenue-III, Regional Office to supply it the necessary documents, it shall give a fresh application within a week hence to the Deputy Director (Revenue) ESI Corporation, Bhubaneswar to supply it all the relevant documents, including the order(s) passed in the 45A proceeding, so also all the previous communications, based on which such an order was passed, enabling it to approach the EI Court under Section 75 of the Act, 1948. On approaching so, the Deputy Director (Revenue), ESI Corporation, Bhubaneswar shall do well to supply all the relevant documents to the Petitioner within two weeks thereafter. On receiving the said documents, including the 45A Order, the Petitioner, if so advised, may move before the concerned EI Court in terms of Section 75 and 77 of the Act, 1948, read with Rule 13 of the EI Court Rules, 1951 within four weeks from the date of receipt of all the documents, along with an application for exemption from deposit of the statutory amount, as required under Section 75(2-B) of the Act, 1948.

8.

On filing of such application along with application for exemption, the concerned EI Court shall do well to deal with such application and pass appropriate order regarding exemption, keeping in mind the fact as to recovery of the entire determined amount from the Petitioner. Thereafter, it shall proceed further on merit in accordance with law and try to conclude the said proceeding at the earliest.

9.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application as per rules. JUDGE (S. K. MISHRA) Mona Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: MONALISA SWAIN Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Odisha Date: 21-Jan-2025 18:07:51

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Orissa High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 31176 of 2024). ← Search more judgments