Learned counsel for the respondents has opposed and has submitted that the notice was issued to the petitioner according to Sections 39 and 40 of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948. It is further submitted that the show cause notice was issued according to law. It is further submitted that as per averments of the petition, the ex-parte order has been passed against the petitioner, which is under challenge in the writ petition. It is further submitted that the statutory remedy is provided under Section 45AA of E.S.I. Act that if an employer is not satisfied with the order referred to in section 45A, he may prefer an appeal to an appellate authority as may be provided by regulation, within sixty days of the date of such order after depositing twenty-five per cent of the contribution so ordered or the contribution as per his own calculation, whichever is higher, with the Corporation. It is further submitted that statutory remedy is provided under Section 75(1)(g) of the said Act, wherein it is provided that any other matter which is in dispute between a principal employer and the Corporation, or between a principal employer and an immediate employer or between a person and the Corporation or between an employee and a principal or immediate employer, in respect of any contribution or benefit or other dues payable or recoverable under this Act, or any other matter required to be or which may be decided by the Employees' Insurance Court under this Act, such question or dispute [subject to the provisions of sub-section (2A)] shall be decided by the Employees' Insurance Court in accordance with the provisions of this Act. It is further submitted that in the Employees State Insurance Act, the statutory remedy is provided under Section 45AA and 75(1)(g) of the Act, therefore, the instant petition is not maintainable.
