M/S. Rubber Wood India Pvt. Ltd. v. The Employees State Insurance Corportion
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 21947 of 2014 (P) ---------------------------- PETITIONER :
----------- M/S. RUBBER WOOD INDIA PVT. LTD., MANGANAM, KOTTAYAM, REP.BY ITS COMPANY SECRETARY-CUM-FINANCE MANAGER. BY ADV. SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON RESPONDENTS :
--------------
1. THE EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORTION, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE (ERNAKULAM), MALU'S COMPLEX, ST.FRANCIS CHURCH ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI-682 017, REP.BY ITS REGIONAL DIRECTOR.
2. THE RECOVERY OFFICER, ESI CORPORATION, KOCHI-17.
R1 & R2 BY SRI.P.SANKARANKUTTY NAIR, SC, ESI CORPN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 21947 of 2014 (P) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :- -------------------- P1 : COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD.11.3.2014 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.
P2 : COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT DTD.15.5.2014. P3 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DTD.25.6.2014. P4 : COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD.31.7.2014. P5 : COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT ISSUED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD.31.7.2014.
P6 : COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DTD.8.8.2014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:- NIL.
---------------------- True copy P.A to Judge
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, J.
------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.21947 of 2014 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of December, 2015
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Exts.P2, P4, P5 and P6 and seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 1st respondent to redetermine the claim for damages under Section 85B of the E.S.I. Act, after affording it an opportunity of being heard.
2.
When this Writ Petition came up for consideration on 1.9.2014 the learned Standing Counsel for the ESI Corporation raised the question of maintainability of the Writ Petition pointing out that the proper remedy available to the petitioner is to challenge the impugned proceedings before the Employees Insurance Court under Section 75 of the ESI Act. In view of the question of maintainability raised, this Court declined relief to the petitioner. However it was ordered that all coercive action to recover the amounts demanded by Ext.P6 shall be kept in abeyance for a period of four weeks so as to enable the petitioner to move the Employees Insurance Court.
W.P.(C).No.21947 of 2014 In view of the above order passed by this Court dated 1.9.2014 the petitioner is not entitled for any further reliefs. In the result, this Writ Petition is dismissed as not maintainable. Sd/- ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE skj True copy P.A to Judge