Disposed

E. Suresh v. the Regional Director

Andhra Pradesh HC22 Jul 2024CRP/1528/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a civil revision petition challenging a docket order rejecting a Returned Suit. The court directed the E.S.I. Court to examine the petitioner's jurisdiction objection and issue a reasoned order to either number the suit or reject it.

What did the court decide?

Directed Employees State Insurance Court to consider petitioner's jurisdiction objection and number the suit or reject it with reasons within one week of re-representation of the bundle.

E. Suresh Vs the Regional Director — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

A —

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶6

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1528 OF 2024

¶7

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, aggrieved by the Docket Order dt 01.07.2024 made in Return Endorsement/Order Dated 01.07.2024 in CFR/Receive No. 3628 In E.S.I. Case No. of 2024 on the file of the Employees State Insurance Court -cum- Principal Senior Civil Judge, Chittoor, Chittoor District

¶8

Between:

¶9

E. Suresh, S/o Late E. Subba Ramaiah, Residing D.No. 13-1-128, P. K. Street, Tirupati, Tirupati District.

¶10

...Revision Petitioner/Plaintiff

¶11

AND

¶12

The Regional Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation, 6-177/A, K.T.Road, Varadaraja Nagar, Tirupati.

¶13

The Authorised Officer, Sub Regional Office, Employees^State Insurance Corporation, 6-1-77/A, K.T.Road, Varadaraja Nagar, Tirupati.

¶14

The Recovery Officer, Employees State Insurance Corporation, 6-177/A, K.T.Road, Varadaraja Nagar, Tirupati.

¶15

...Respondents/Respondents

¶16

^ lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶17

that in the circumstances

¶18

\5Petition under Section 151 CPC praying

¶19

-stated in the affidavit filed in^{supportofthepetition,theHighCourtmaybe} of Certified/Original in Return

¶20

pleased to Dispense with the filing kndorsement/Order Dated 01.07.2024 in CFR/Receive No. 3628 In E.S.I. the file of Employees State Insurance Court -cum-

¶21

Case No. Of 2024 on Chittoor District pending disposal of

¶22

Principal Senior Civil Judge, Chittoor the main C.R.P.

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri. O Udaya Kumar

¶24

Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared

¶25

The Court made the following:

¶26

APHC010289082024

¶27

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3206] (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶28

TUESDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶29

PRESENT

¶30

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶31

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1528/2024

¶32

Between;

¶33

E. Suresh ...PETITIONER

¶34

AND

¶35

The Regional Director and Others ...RESPONDENT{S)

¶36

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶37

1.0 UDAYA KUMAR

¶38

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶39

¶40

The Court made the following order:

¶41

The Authorised Officer, Sub Regional Office, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Varadaraja Nagar, Tirupati had^{issuedaCertificate} No.7182023317 dated 09.11.2023, against the petitioner. Thereafter, the 3'^'^ respondent -Recovery Officer initiated action, for recovery of the said amount payable under the said certificate, to an extent of Rs. 12,44,434/-. Aggrieved by the action of the 2"^^ respondent in issuing the^{certificateandtheactionof} the 3'"' respondent seeking to recover the said amount, the petitioner had approached the Employees State Insurance Court-cum-Principal^SeniorCivil Judge, Chittor, byway of a E.S.I case.

¶42

However, the case filed by the petitioner was returned-with^the n objection as to how the said Court would have jurisdiction. The petitioner is said to have filed a reply explaining how jurisdiction is vested with the said Court.

¶43

The Principal Senior Civil Judge, Chittoor had returned^thebundle stating that the initial objection had not been explained.

¶44

Aggrieved by the said return, the petitioner had approached^this Court. One of the contentions raised by the petitioner is the order of the rejection has been passed without assigning any reasons.

¶45

In the circumstances, it would be appropriate to dispose^ofthe said Civil Revision Petition with a direction to the Employees State Insurance Court to consider the objections given by the petitioner^{andtoeithernumber} the suit or to reject the same after giving reasons.

¶46

The said orders to be passed within one week of the re presentation of the bundle, by the petitioner.

¶47

Accordingly, this Civil Revision petition is disposed^{of.Thereshall} be no order as to costs.

¶48

¶49

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any,^{shallstandclosed.} Sd/- SHAIK MOHD. RAFI

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Employees State Insurance Court -cum- Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division): Chittoor, Chittoor District

¶55

One CC to Sri O. Udaya Kumar, Advocate [OPUC]

¶56

Three CD Copies

C AA/T

HIGH COURT

DATED:23/07/2024

X-’

ORDER

CRP.No.1528 of 2024

:/ar o
2 6 JUL 2024 m
•f*/
'k Section w

¶65

DISPOSING OF THIS CRP

E. Suresh v. the Regional Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

E. Suresh v. the Regional Director

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

Similar cases

Mrs. Godata Laxmi Vs The Government of A.P. rep. by Principal Secretary

P. Bhaskar, Vs Comer Stone World Challenge

Ramakka Vs Muneppa

I. Koti Reddy, Vs Smt. a. Surya Kumari

S Ravi Vs D Nirup Kumar

Jajala Muni Chandra Vs GaliChalapathy