The Patna High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an order directing the petitioner to pay ESI contributions, holding that the availability of a statutory remedy rendered the writ application not maintainable.
The writ application was dismissed as not maintainable.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6634 of 2016
===========================================================
M/s Jayshree Enterprises, Shekhpura House (Beldari Tola), Sheikhpura, Beli Road, Patna through its Proprietor Sohrai Ram son of Late Raja Ram, resident of Sheikhpura House (Beldari Tola), P.S.- Shastri Nagar, District- Patna.
.... .... Petitioner/s
.... .... Respondent/s
=========================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jitendra Singh, Advocate : Mr. Krishna Deo Raj, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dr. Anshuman, Advocate
=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 11-04-2017
By way of the present application preferred under Article
226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 06.08.2015 passed by the Deputy Director, Employees’ State Insurance Corporation under Section 45A of the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short ‘the ESI Act’) whereby the petitioner has been directed to pay the contribution amount worth
Patna High Court CWJC No.6634 of 2016 dt.11-04-2017
2/2
Rs.6,41,355/- for fifty two months from the period 01.07.2010 to 31.10.2014. The challenge is also to the letter dated 21.12.2015 issued by the respondents authority to the Recovery Officer for compliance of the aforesaid order dated 06.08.2015.
2. A preliminary objection has been raised by the learned counsel for the Employees’ State Insurance Corporation regarding maintainability of the writ application. He submitted that there is statutory remedy available to the petitioner under Section 45-AA of the ESI Act.
3. I find substance in the preliminary objection raised by the respondents Corporation.
4. Regard being had to the availability of equally efficacious statutory remedy to the petitioner under Section 45-AA of the ESI Act, I am not inclined to entertain the present application filed under extraordinary writ jurisdiction. It is, accordingly, dismissed as not maintainable.
(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)
Md.S./-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | N/A |
| Uploading Date | 14.04.2017 |
| Transmission Date |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable when an equally efficacious statutory remedy exists under Section 45-AA of the ESI Act.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
M/s Jayshree Enterprises
Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Patna
Director, State Insurance Corporation, Patna
Deputy Director, State Insurance Corporation, Patna
Recovery Officer, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Patna
Regional Office, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Patna
Ashwani Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
