The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging an order under Section 45-A of the ESI Act, 1948, holding that the petitioner failed to exhaust statutory remedies by not appealing under Section 45AA before filing the writ.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2024:KHC:45506 WP No. 1029 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 1029 OF 2023 (L-ESI)
BETWEEN:
MR. GIRISHKUNDAPUR S/O ANNUDEVADIGA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, SHABHARI HOUSE, J.L.B.ROAD, VODERHOBLI, KUNDAPURA, UDUPI-576 201. (PROPRIETOR OF M/S. G.K.CONSTRUCTIONS).
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. ASHWIN., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. AKASH.B.SHETTY., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. PRIYANKA.S.BHAT., CGC FOR R1; SMT. VARSHINI., ADVOCATE FOR SMT. GEETHADEVI.M.P., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
NC: 2024:KHC:45506 WP No. 1029 of 2023
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.
THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
Sri.Ashwin., counsel on behalf of Sri.Akash B.Shetty., for the petitioner and Smt.Varshini., counsel on behalf of Smt.Geetha Devi.M.P., for respondent No.2 have appeared in person.
opposed to the principles of natural justice. Hence, an appropriate order may be passed.
By way of reply to this contention, counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the petitioner has not availed the alternate statutory remedy. Counsel therefore, submits that the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed.
The oral submission made by counsel for the respective parties is placed on record.
NC: 2024:KHC:45506 WP No. 1029 of 2023
6. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is dismissed .
Sd/(JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE
MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should exercise writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 to quash an order passed under Section 45-A of the ESI Act, 1948.
Whether the petitioner availed the alternate statutory remedy of appeal under Section 45-A A before approaching the High Court.
Whether the impugned order violated the principles of natural justice.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
MR. GIRISHKUNDAPUR S/O ANNUDEVADIGA (PROPRIETOR OF M/S. G.K.CONSTRUCTIONS)
UNION OF INDIA
EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION
DEPUTY DIRECTOR, EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION
JYOTI MULIMANI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
