ORDER 1. Heard Sri. B.C. Seetharama Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, perused the pleadings and examined the order dated 9.1.2013 Annexure-H of the Commissioner for Employees’ Compensation, Mandya Subdivision. 2. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners/applicants in the proceedings for compensation under the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 before the Commissioner for Employees’ Compensation, Mandya Subdivision in WCA/CR/104106/2005 are none other than the claimants in WCA 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 of 2005 before the Commissioner for Employees’ Compensation, Chamarajanagar which was disposed of on 30.3.2007 and compensation made over and therefore, the Commissioner, Mandya Subdivision has neither jurisdiction nor competence to readjudicate upon the very same claims in the subsequent proceedings. 3. The Insurance Company having put forth the aforesaid submission before the Commissioner for Employees’ Compensation, Mandya Subdivision, to dismiss the applications, it has to lay before the Commissioner, enough and more material to substantiate the claim. If ultimately on an adjudication it is proved that the claim of the Insurance Company is well founded, it is for the Commissioner for Employees’ Compensation to pass necessary orders and therefore, the Insurance Company must await a decision and not come rushing to this court calling in question the order, Annexure-H, justifiably rejecting IA filed by the Insurance Company to dismiss the claim petitions. The petitions are rejected.