Disposed

The Millennium School,Lucknow Thru. Administration Officer Sachin Kumar Dubey v. Employees State Insurance Corporation Thru. Director General and 3 Others

Allahabad HC8 Nov 2024A227/5307/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged orders requiring a 25% deposit under the ESIC Act before hearing an appeal, arguing full recovery had already occurred. Court directed the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal without insisting on this deposit if full recovery is prima facie evident, to be heard within four months.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be exempted from depositing 25% if entire amount was recovered; appeal to be heard within four months.

The Millennium School,Lucknow Thru. Administration… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:73885

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5307 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- The Millennium School,Lucknow Thru. Administration Officer Sachin Kumar Dubey Respondent :- Employees State Insurance Corporation Thru. Director General And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Devak Vardhan,Gaurav Mehrotra

¶5

Counsel for Respondent :- Shishir Pradhan

¶6

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Gaurav Mehrotra and Sri Devak Vardhan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Shishir Pradhan, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material available on record.

¶8

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 08.10.2024 as well as the order dated 16.10.2024, whereby the petitioner was directed to deposit an amount of 25% which is required in terms of proviso to Section 45AA of the ESIC Act, 1948 prior to hearing of the appeal on merits. The main contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that in terms of the demand, which is subject matter of appeal filed by the petitioner under Section 45-AA of the ESIC Act, the entire amount has been recovered as is evident from the communication dated 11.05.2022 contained in Annexure No. 20. According to the counsel for the petitioner, there is no logic directing the petitioner to deposit an

¶9

amount of 25% as the entire amount has already been recovered from the petitioner.

¶10

Considering the said statement, the present petition is disposed of directing the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal preferred by the petitioner under Section 45-AA of the ESIC Act without insisting to pay an amount of 25%, in case, the entire amount has been recovered from the petitioner as is evident prima facie from the communication dated 11.05.2022. The Appeal shall be heard and disposed of in accordance with law with all expedition preferably within a period of four months.

¶11

Order Date :- 8.11.2024 Arun

¶12

Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

The Millennium School,Lucknow Thru. Administration Officer Sachin Kumar Dubey v. Employees State Insurance Corporation Thru. Director General and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Millennium School,Lucknow Thru. Administration Officer Sachin Kumar Dubey v. Employees State Insurance Corporation Thru. Director General and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Messers Anil Sugar Industries Thru Partner and 2 Ors. Vs Additional Distt. Judge Lakhimpur Kheri and 9 Ors.

Kamini @ Kamini Yadav Vs Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No. 6, Lucknow and Another

Rashmi Shukla alias Rashmi Bajpai Vs Ramesh Kumar Shukla

Shalini Mishra vs Suraj Mishra

Keerti Bajpai Vs Gaurav Bajpai

Reena Kumari Vs Anand Prakash Maurya