Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
M/S Unique Fabcare Pvt. Ltd vs The Appellate Authority on 9 July, 2019
Author: Dinesh Mehta
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9664/2019 M/s Unique Fabcare Pvt. Ltd., through its Director Laxmi Lal Gandhi S/o Hagami Lal, Age 68 Years, R/o F-13 Basant Vihar, Bhilwara, District Bhilwara (Rajasthan).
----Petitioner Versus
1. The Appellate Authority, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Panchdeep Bhawan, Bhawani Singh Marg, Jaipur-1 (Rajasthan).
2. Dy. Director, Sub-Regional Office, Employees State Insurance Corporation, 5, Bhupalpura, (R K Plaza), Near Shastri Circle, Udaipur (Rajasthan).
3. The Social Security Officer, Employees State Insurance Corporation Local Office Panchdeep Bhawan, Pratap Nagar, Pur Road, Bhilwara (Rajasthan).
----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prem Dayal Bohra.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. M. R. Pareek.
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Judgment
09/07/2019
The present writ petition is directed against the order dated 15.05.2019, passed by the Appellate Authority, Employees' State Insurance Corporation, Jaipur whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order 11.01.2019 has been rejected.
Briefly narrated, the facts appertain to the present petition are that the respondent No.2 passed an order dated 11.01.2019 and raised a demand of Rs.3,04,054/- against the petitioner for the period between June, 2017 and August, 2018. The petitioner proposed to prefer an appeal there-against, for which it deposited (Downloaded on 10/07/2019 at 11:10:10 PM) (2 of 3) [CW-9664/2019] requisite 25% of the amount on 10.03.2019 and produced the challan alongwith communication dated 08.04.2019, considering the same (letter dated 08.04.2019) to be an appeal.
The said appeal has been rejected by the Appellate Authority-respondent No.1 vide its order dated 15.05.2019, interalia observing that the petitiioner-employer has not detailed any grounds or enclosed documents in support of his appeal.
Mr. Bohra, learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset submitted that it is true that the petitioner-Company has not stated any facts or taken any grounds in his alleged memo of appeal dated 08.04.2019 (Annex.2), but looking to the fact that the appeal in question has been filed by Director of the Company, who was not well versed with the legal provision, one opportunity may be granted to the petitioner.
Mr. Pareek, learned counsel appearing for the respondent- ESI Corporation contends that the petitioner ought to have filed proper memo of appeal narrating facts and grounds for which he wanted to challenge the order dated 11.01.2019, passed by the respondent No.2. In absence of any particulars or proper memo of appeal, the Appellate Authority was perfectly justified in rejecting the so called appeal.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court finds that the petitioner had an intention to file an appeal, for which it had deposited a sum of Rs.3,04,054/- on 10.03.2019. Having deposited the amount, the pre-requisite condition for maintainability of appeal, the petitioner has simply sent a registered letter dated 08.04.2019, with a prayer to set aside the (Downloaded on 10/07/2019 at 11:10:10 PM) (3 of 3) [CW-9664/2019] order dated 11.01.2019, passed under Section 45-A of the ESI Act, 1948.
It is true that the letter dated 08.04.2019 cannot be construed to be an appeal, as it lacked the basic tenets of an appeal. However, keeping in view that the petitioner wanted redressal of his grievance against the order dated 11.01.2019, this Court, in the interest of justice, deems it appropriate to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to file a proper memorandum of appeal.
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 15.05.2019 (Annex.3) is, therefore, quashed and set aside.
The petitioner is provided three weeks' time to file proper memorandum of appeal, setting out requisite facts and grounds in support of his appeal. If the memo of appeal is filed by 31.07.2019, the Appellate Authority shall decide the same in accordance with law.
The stay application No.9558/2019 is also disposed of.
(DINESH MEHTA),J 44-A.Arora/-
(Downloaded on 10/07/2019 at 11:10:10 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)