JUDGMENT Pradeep Kumar, J. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for petitioner and learned Counsel for the respondents. 2. It appears by the impugned order dated 26.2.2008 passed in E.S.I. Case No. 05 of 2005 that the Labour Court, Deoghar, in an appeal filed by the petitioner- company dated 29.11.2005 challenging the order of the Employee State Insurance demanding payment of Rs. 6,41,177/- and prayer that application may be admitted without payment of half of the amount as per the provisions of the act, followed the provisions of Sub-Section 2-B of Section 75 of the Employees State Insurance Coporation Act(E.S.I.C.) Act and directed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 3,20,589/- and rejected the petition dated 29.11.2005. 3. Learned Counsel for petitioner submits that he has raised the dispute that there is no hospital near about his industries and worker has to go 6/7 km away to Jasidih which is the nearest ESIC, Hospital, hence, his industry is not liable to pay such a huge amount and he had applied that appeal will be admitted without depositing of 50% of the demanded amount. He has further contended that as per Section 75(2B) of the ESIC act "the court may for reasons to be recorded in writing, waive or reduce the amount to be deposited under this Sub-section", as such the impugned order is bad in law and fit to be set aside. 4. Learned Counsel for the respondents, Mr. P.K. Bhoumik submits that earlier also petitioner- industry, Bihar Industrial Corporation had filed C.W.J.C bearing No. 11406 of 1999 and this Court by its order dated 27.6.2003 accepted that although there is dispute, the same can be decided only an Insurance Court under the ESIC Act and the petitioner, their employer have got hospital road from the beginning to ESIC Hospital, Jasidih which is well connected with train and road and hence, they are liable to pay Employee State contribution of the workman and employer both. 5. 5. After hearing both the parties and going through evidences on record and also perusing the judgment passed in CWJC No. 11406/1999 dated 27.6.2003, this Court has also found that there is dispute, since no ESIC hospital is available to the worker at Madhupur rather it is available at 6 km away from the work place and since workmen, employer, both are facing difficulty, in that view of the matter, the court has also considered the provisions of Section 75(2B) of ESIC act, 1948 which is as under: No matter which is in dispute between a principal employer and the Corporation in respect of any contribution or any other dues shall be raised by the principal employer in the Employees' Insurance Court unless he has deposited with the court fifty percent of the amount due from him as claimed by the Corporation. Provided that the court may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, waive or reduce the amount to be deposited under this Sub-section. 6. As per the provision, since, the amount may be reduced for reasons to be recorded considering the dispute in appeal, in that view of the matter, in the instant case, since there is no hospital, since long at the work place, hence the employer- petitioner is directed to deposit 25% of the demanded amount i.e. Rs. 1,60,294.50/- and the impugned order dated 26.2.2008 is accordingly, quashed and replaced by this order and Labour Court is directed to proceed with the appeal after the employer- petitioner has deposited the aforesaid 25% of the demanded amount. 7. With the aforesaid direction, the application is disposed of. Application allowed.