Dismissed¶24

M/S New Narayan Binding Works and Anr. v. Employees State Insurance Corporation and Ors.

Calcutta HC19 Feb 2026WPA/3713/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

New Narayan Binding Works v. ESIC — WPA 3713 of 2026, decided 19.02.2026 (Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.). Garnishee order(s) dated 30.07.2025 under S.45G ESI Act, 1948 pursuant to S.45A order dated 4.12.2013; petitioner represented on 16.2.2012 then ceased appearing; writ dismissed for ignoring statutory duties/delay of over 12 years; natural justice; contention of six employees/non-coverage via Srinivasa Rice Mill (2006 Supreme (SC) 1094) not entertained as point could have been raised before the authority.

What did the court decide?

This Court finds no merit in the petitioner's submission: the petitioner ignored his statutory duties and approached the Court after more than 12 years, and relief, if granted, would be against the principle of natural justice. ¶18

M/S New Narayan Binding Works and Anr. Vs Employees State Insurance Corporation and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

19.02.2026 Item No.38 Ct. No. 30 BR

¶2

WPA 3713 of 2026

¶3

M/s. New Narayan Binding Works and another -vs-

¶4

ESIC and ors.

¶5

Mr. U.Banerjee ,

¶6

Mr. Subhrakanti Samanta

¶7

… for the petitioner

¶8

Mr. Dipak R. Mukherjee,

¶9

.. for the respondent

¶10

Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner be kept with the record.

¶11

The writ application has been preferred challenging a Garnishee order dated 30^th July, 2025 and 30^th July, 2025 issued under Section 45G of the ESI Act, 1948..

¶12

It appears that the said order has been passed under Section 45A of the ESI Act dated 4.12.2013.

¶13

It is the contention of the petitioner that the petitioner was not aware of such an order being passed and till date he has not received the order and it is only after the garnishee order was served upon him, that the petitioner realised that such an order has been passed.

¶14

It appears on perusal of the order under Section 45A of the ESI Act dated

¶15

4.12.2013 that the petitioner was duly

¶16

¶17

represented before the authority concerned on 16.2.2012 and since then the petitioner did not appear any further in the said hearing.

¶18

More than 12 years have passed since the order has been passed and this Court finds no merit in the submission of the petitioner herein who has ignored his statutory duties has approached the Court for relief, which if granted shall be against the principle of natural justice.

¶19

The petitioner herein relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in M/s Srinivasa Rice Mill -vsEmployee State Insurance Corporation, reported in 2006 Supreme (SC) 1094 on the ground that the petitioner establishment is not covered under the ESI Act.

¶20

It is submitted that only six employees are working in the said establishment and it does not come within the purview of ESI Act.

¶21

Considering that the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court was passed in the year 2006, it was open to the petitioner to raise the point of jurisdiction before the authority concerned during

¶22

¶23

the hearing under Section 45A of the ESI Act, which initially the petitioner attended and subsequently failed to do so.

¶24

Considering the said conduct of the petitioner , the writ application having no merit stands dismissed and is accordingly disposed of.

¶25

Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned counsel for the parties on usual undertakings.

¶26

(Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.)

M/S New Narayan Binding Works and Anr. v. Employees State Insurance Corporation and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S New Narayan Binding Works and Anr. v. Employees State Insurance Corporation and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harish Vs Union of India and Anr.

Sandip Sengupta Vs Pushpalata Sengupta

Priya Roy Chowdhury Vs Soumen Bhowmick

Batliboi Environmental Engineering Ltd. Vs Eastern Metec Pvt. Ltd.

Aslam Sk. and Anr. Vs Nasima Sk. and Ors.

M/S. Murlidhar Ratanlal Exports Limtied Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.