Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 3280 (MAD)

Samudra Shoe Overseas Ltd. v. Regional Employees State Insurance Corporation, Chennai

2008-09-06

M.JAICHANDREN

body2008
Judgment :- 1. This petition has been filed praying for a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the order of the respondent in No.TN/Recy/ESI/CPI/51-57730/22/ CCR:11897 dated 30.08.2000, quash the same and to direct the respondent to waive the damages/final interest for delayed contribution of Employees State Insurance under Section 85-B of the Employees State Insurance Act,1948. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that the petitioner is a manufacturer and exporter of leather shoes having its registered office at No.282, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Sholinganallur, Chennai. There are 120 workers working in the factory. The petitioner started incurring losses due to various difficulties, including paucity of export orders. Therefore, the Petitioner made an application for registration with the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction, New Delhi, as per the provisions of the Sick Industrial Companies Act, 1985. While so the respondent had raised a demand of Rs.46,871/- being the damages for delayed payment of Employees State Insurance contributions. The petitioner had appeared before the respondent Board for waiver of the amount claimed from the petitioner. However the respondent on conducting an enquiry on 20.08.2000, had confirmed its earlier demand. In such circumstances the petitioner has filed the present writ petition before this court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent corporation had submitted that the respondent corporation does not have the power to waive the charges due from the petitioner for delayed payment of Employees State Insurance contribution. However, it is open to the petitioner to approach the Employees Insurance Court under, Section 75 of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948, praying for the reliefs as prayed for in the present writ petition. 4. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the respondent, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, it is open to the petitioner to approach the Employees Insurance Court by way of an appropriate proceedings, invoking the relevant provisions of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5. With the above observations, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.