SEKAR REPORTER

Court News from Madras High Court

ESI case order/ Hon’ble Mr. Justice S. Vaidyanathan, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice B. Bhattacharjee, Judge

by ·

r

Serial No. 01
Supplementary List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG
W.A.N0.17 of 2024
This matter is listed today under the caption tTo be Mentioned’ at
the instance of the learned counsel for the ESIC.

  1. Learned counsel for the ESIC has submitted that in the
    judgment dated 14.05.2024, the ESIC has been wrongly mentioned as Employer in several places. Likewise, In Paragraph No. 4 of the
    judgment, there is an error in referring to the Court as “EST COU1t” instead of “Civil Court”. Thus, the judgment needs suitable modification. The said mistakes crept in have not been disputed by the leamed counsel appearing for the respondent.
  2. On a perusal of the judgment dated 14.05.2024, it is seen that
    inadvertent errors had crept in, as stated by the learned counsel for the ESIC. In view of the same, this Court directs the Registry to incorporate the word “ESIC’ in the places of “Employer” and similarly, alter the word with “Civil Court” in lieu of “‘ESI Court” in Paragraph No.4 and
    to issue a fresh copy of the judgment forthwith. fil- Sd
    (B. Bhåftacharjee) (S. aidy”athan)
    Judge Chief Justice
    Meghalaya 17.05.2024
    “Sylvana QS’
    Agctte Reqy;trar
    High Court of Msghalaya
    Stü!long
    Serial No. 02 Regular List
    HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAVA AT SHILLONG
    WA No. 17 of 2024
    Date of order: 14.05.2024
  3. Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC), Represented by the Deputy Director I/C, NE Region, Guwahati, Assam.
  4. The Recovery Officer,
    Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC), NE Region, Regional Office, Guwahati, Assam.
  5. The Authorised Officer,
    Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC), Represented by the Deputy Director I/C, NE Region, Guwahati, Assam.
  6. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India,
    Laitumkhrah (Shillong) Branch, Shillong.
    vs.
    Shri Ngaitlang Dhar s/o Shri K. Pala,
    Wo Lower Nongrim Hills,Shillong, Appellants
    East Khasi Hills, Meghalaya. Respondent

Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice S. Vaidyanathan, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice B. Bhattacharjee, Judge

Appearance:
For the Appellants Ms. B. Khongthaw, Adv.
For the Respondent Mr. S. Deb, Adv.
Mr. N.D. Chullai, AAG with
Ms. Z.E.Nongkynrih, GA
Whether approved for reporting in Law journals etc.:
ii) Whether approved for publication in press:

4
JUDGMENT
(Made bp Hon ‘bles the Chie(Justice)
The present appeal has been preferred against the order dated
17.08.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge, by which a direction was issued to the Writ Petitioner to approach the Civil Court, pursuant to the non-availability of the ESI Court. The *ESIC has preferred this Writ Appeal, stating that there is no ESI court and therefore, the *ESIC has no other Option, but to approach this Court.
Z Learned counsel for the respondent has contended that in terms of Section 75 (3) of the Employees’ State Insurance Act* 1948, the jurisdiction of Civil Court is ousted. The Writ Petitioner cannot approach the ESI Court and he has to knock at the doors of this Court in the absence of ESI Court.

  1. On 18.032024, this Court has passed an order, directing the Deputy Director Of the Corporation to appear before this Court virtually, pursuant to which, the Deputy Director has appeared virtually today and learned AAG has produced a Government Order dated 03.04.2024 nominating the Chief Judicial Magistrate at Shillong to be the ELSI Court covering the whole State of Meghalaya and the Notification issued by the Government is reproduced below:

a
“ORDER BY THE GOVERNOR NOTIFICATION
Dated Shillong, the 3 rd April, 2024
No. LE&SD. 104/93/262 — In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 74 of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 read with Rule 3 of the Meghalaya Employees’ State Insurance Courts Rules, 1980, the Governor of Meghalaya is pleased to constitute for the purpose of the said Act, the Employees State Insurance Court as specified in the Schedule herein below
-SCHEDULE-
Name of the Court Presidin Officer Jurisdiction
mployees State nsurance Court Chief Judicial
Ma istrate at Shillon hole State of e hala a
Earlier Government Notification No.LBI. 104/93/251 dt.23.03.2023 is hereby cancelled.
C. Sangte, IRS,
Principal Secretary to the Govt. of Meghalaya,
Department of Labour, Employment & Skill Development”

  1. In view of the aforesaid Notification, the Writ Petitioner is now permitted to approach the ESI Court and the period during which the Writ Petition and the Writ Appeal are pending, shall be excluded for the purpose of calculating the delay. The observation made by the learned Single Judge that the Writ Petitioner has to approach the *Civil Court may not be correct in the light of Section 75 (3). Section 75 (3) is reproduced hereunder för the purpose of clarity:
    “75 (3) No Civil Court shall have jurisdiction to decide or deal with any question or dispute as aforesaid or to adjudicate on any liability which by or under this Act is to be decided by [a

4
SAI-
medical board, or by a medical appeal tribunal or by the Employees’ Insurance Court].”

  1. It is made clear that any observation made by the leamed Single Judge touching upon the merits of the case cannot have a bearing for the ESI Court to decide the matter on merits and uninfluenced by the order of the learned Single Judge in respect of merits of the matter, if any, the ESI Court shall have to decide the issue, including the application for waiver and for deposit of money.
  2. At this juncture, it is brought to our notice by the learned counsel for the respondent herein that the Writ Petitioner has approached the Civil Court pursuant to orders of this Court. In the light of the observation made hereinabove, the Civil Court has no jurisdiction and the suit will have to be dismissed on the ground of lack of jurisdiction.
  3. With the above obser’vations and directions, the Writ Appeal

stands disposed of.

sdl-    SUI-

(B. Bhattacharjee)
Judge
Meghalaya
14.05.2024 per the or”r dataflZOf2024.
4
Aggtt. Registrer
The High Court of %th81ay8
Shillong

ecent ruling, the Madras High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the income tax demand payment notice of Rs. 17.1 lakhs citing no merits. The court noted that the petitioner did not make any challenge to quash the income tax assessment orders which reached its finality. The bench of Justice K. Rajasekar stated… https://sekarreporter.com/recent-ruling-the-madras-high-court-dismissed-the-writ-petition-challenging-the-income-tax-demand-payment-notice-of-rs-17-1-lakhs-citing-no-merits-the-court-noted-that-the-petitioner-did-not-make-a/

You may also like...