JUDGMENT : PRAVEER BHATNAGAR, J. 1. The instant appeal has been filed against the impugned order dated 24.05.2022, whereby, the original application filed by the appellant Institute under Section 75(1)(g) of the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1948’) for declaring the demand letter dated 20.03.2017 issued by the respondent as void, was dismissed by the Employee Insurance Court, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as the ‘ESI Court’) on the grounds of being time-barred while rejecting the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. 2. In a nutshell, the appellant preferred an Original Application under Section 75(1)(g) of the Act of 1948 alongwith the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act before the ESI Court questioning the order dated 20.03.2017 of the respondent passed under Section 45A of the Act of 1948, whereby, a sum of Rs.10,51,050/- was determined as a statutory arrear of contribution payable by the Institution for the period from April, 2012 to November, 2016. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the cause of action in respect of the claim by the Corporation for recovering contributions from the principal employer shall be deemed to be reckoned from the date on which such claim is made for the first time as per Section 77(1A)(b) of the Act of 1948. It is further submitted that the limitation period under Section 77(1A) for applying Section 75(g) of the Act of 1948 Act is three years from the date of the cause of action. In the instant case, the order dated 20.03.2017 is a first-time claim raised by the Corporation and the said letter came to the notice of the appellant on 20.05.2017 and the appellant submitted the application under Section 75(g) on 28.10.2020. 4. It is submitted that the learned ESI Court erred in computing the cause of action from the letters dated 29.12.2016 and 31.12.2016, wherein such letters cannot be termed as first-time claims as incorporated in Section 77(1A)(b) of the said Act of 1948. It is further submitted that the letters dated 29.12.2016 and 31.12.2016 were not regarding the determination of the ESI Contribution as required under Section 45A of the Act of 1948. Therefore, the impugned order dated 24.05.2022 be quashed and the concerned ESI Court be directed to decide the original application under Section 75(G) following the law. 5. It is further submitted that the letters dated 29.12.2016 and 31.12.2016 were not regarding the determination of the ESI Contribution as required under Section 45A of the Act of 1948. Therefore, the impugned order dated 24.05.2022 be quashed and the concerned ESI Court be directed to decide the original application under Section 75(G) following the law. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant relied on the judgment of Madhya Pradesh High Court in E.S.I. Corporation vs. Depot Manager, MPSRTC, Indore, Misc. Appeal No. 1556/2002, decided on 27.11.2022. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent endorsed the impugned order and relied on the judgments of Allahabad High Court and Madras High Court in Allahabad Canning Company vs. Regional Director, E.S.I.C. 1998 (79) FLR 947 , M/s Allahabad Canning Company vs. The Regional Director E.S.I.C. and Others, Special Appeal No. 472/1998, decided on 29.08.2013 and Standard Literature Co. (P) Ltd. vs. Employees’ State Insurance, 2001 (99) FLR 389. 7. Before scrutinizing the substance of the appeal the scheme of the Act of 1948 needs to be described: “Section 45A - Determination of contributions in certain cases: (1) Where in respect of a factory or establishment no returns, particulars, registers or records are submitted, furnished or maintained in accordance with the provisions of Section 44 or any [Social Security Officer] or other official of the Corporation referred to in subsection (2) of section 45 is [prevented in any manner] by the principal or immediate employer or any other person, in exercising his functions or discharging his duties under section 45, the Corporation may, on the basis of information available to it, by order, determine the amount of contributions payable in respect of the employees of that factory or establishment. Provided that no such order shall be passed by the Corporation unless the principal or immediate employer or the person in charge of the factory or establishment has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Provided further that no such order shall be passed by the Corporation in respect of the period beyond five years from the date on which the contribution shall become payable. Provided further that no such order shall be passed by the Corporation in respect of the period beyond five years from the date on which the contribution shall become payable. (2) An order made by the Corporation under sub-section (1) shall be sufficient proof of the claim of the Corporation under section 75 or for recovery of the amount determined by such order as an arrear of land revenue under section 45B [or the recovery under sections 45C to 45-I].” “Section 75 - Matters to be decided by the Employees’ Insurance Court: (1) If any question or dispute arises as to: (a) whether any person is an employee within the meaning of this Act or whether he is liable to pay the employee’s contribution. (b) the rate of wages or average daily wages of an employee for the purposes of this Act. (c) the rate of contribution payable by a principal employer in respect of any employee. (d) the person who is or was the principal employer in respect of any employee. (e) the right of any person to any benefit and as to the amount and duration thereof. (ee) any direction issued by the Corporation under section 55A on a review of any payment of dependants’ benefits. [***] (g) any other matter which is in dispute between a principal employer and the Corporation, or between a principal employer and an immediate employer or between a person and the Corporation or between an employee and a principal or immediate employer, in respect of any contribution or benefit or other dues payable or recoverable under this Act, [or any other matter required to be or which may be decided by the Employees’ Insurance Court under this Act], such question or dispute [subject to the provisions of sub-section (2A)] shall be decided by the Employees’ Insurance Court in accordance with the provisions of this Act. (2) [Subject to the provisions of sub-section (2A), the following claims] shall be decided by the Employees’ Insurance Court, namely: (a) claim for the recovery of contributions from the principal employer. (b) claim by a principal employer to recover contributions from any immediate employer. (c) [***] (d) claim against a principal employer under section 68. (e) claim under section 70 for the recovery of the value or amount of the benefits received by a person when he is not lawfully entitled thereto. (b) claim by a principal employer to recover contributions from any immediate employer. (c) [***] (d) claim against a principal employer under section 68. (e) claim under section 70 for the recovery of the value or amount of the benefits received by a person when he is not lawfully entitled thereto. (f) any claim for the recovery of any benefit admissible under this Act. (2A) If in any proceedings before the Employees’ Insurance Court a disablement question arises and the decision of a medical board or a medical appeal tribunal has not been obtained on the same and the decision of such question is necessary for the determination of the claim or question before the Employees’ Insurance Court, that Court shall direct the Corporation to have the question decided by this Act and shall thereafter proceed with the determination of the claim or question before it in accordance with the decision of the medical board or the medical appeal tribunal, as the case may be, except where an appeal has been filed before the Employees’ Insurance Court under sub-section (2) of section 54A in which case the Employees’ Insurance Court may itself determine all the issues arising before it. (2B) 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 per cent. 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. (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 medical board, or by a medical appeal tribunal or by the Employees’ Insurance Court].” “Section-77 - Commencement of proceedings: (1) The proceeding before an Employees’ Insurance Court shall be commenced by application. (1A) Every such application shall be made within a period of three years from the date on which the cause of action arose. (1A) Every such application shall be made within a period of three years from the date on which the cause of action arose. Explanation - For the purpose of this sub-section: (a) the cause of action in respect of a claim for benefit shall not be deemed to arise unless the insured person or in the case of dependants’ benefit, the dependants of the insured person claims or claim that benefit in accordance with the regulations made in that behalf within a period of twelve months after the claim became due or within such further period as the Employees’ Insurance Court may allow on grounds which appear to it to be reasonable. (b) the cause of action in respect of a claim by the Corporation for recovering contributions (including interest and damages) from the principal employer shall be deemed to have arisen on the date on which such claim is made by the Corporation for the first time: Provided that no claim shall be made by the Corporation after five years of the period to which the claim relates. (c) the cause of action in respect of a claim by the principal employer for recovering contributions from an immediate employer shall not be deemed to arise till the date by which the evidence of contributions having been paid is due to be received by the Corporation under the regulations. (2) Every such application shall be in such form and shall contain such particulars and shall be accompanied by such fee, if any, as may be prescribed by rules made by the State Government in consultation with the Corporation.” 8. In the matter of M/s Allahabad Canning Company vs. The Regional Director E.S.I.C. and decided on 29 August, 2013 in the Special Appeal No. 472 of 1998 the court held that: “The Legislature has provided for a special remedy to deal with special cases. The determination of the claim is left to the Corporation, which is based on the information available to it. It shows whether information is sufficient or not or the Corporation is able to get information from the employer or not, on the available records, the Corporation could determine the arrears. So, the non-availability of the records after five years, as per the Regulation, would not debar the Corporation to determine the amount of arrears. It shows whether information is sufficient or not or the Corporation is able to get information from the employer or not, on the available records, the Corporation could determine the arrears. So, the non-availability of the records after five years, as per the Regulation, would not debar the Corporation to determine the amount of arrears. Therefore, if the provisions of Section 45A are read with Section 45B of the Act, then, the determination made by the Corporation is concerned. It may not be final so far as the employer is concerned, if he chooses to challenge it by filing an application under Section 75 of the Act. If the employer fails to challenge the said determination under Section 75 of the Act before the Court, then the determination under Section 45A becomes final against the employer as well. As such, there is no hurdle for recovery of the amount determined under Section 45B of the Act, by invoking the mode of recovery, as contemplated in Sections 45C to 45-I.” 9. Therefore, it is obvious from the above scheme of the Act of 1948 that the proceedings under Section 45A of the Act of 1948 are signified for determining the arrear of contribution payable by the employer. 10. The proceedings under Section 45A of the Act of 1948 are a determination or a first-time claim (as described in section 77(1) (b) of the Act of 1948) by the corporations against the employer computing the arrears of contribution payable by the employer and prior notices to the employer are only to provide an opportunity for hearing and furnishing the documents before the concerned determining authority. In the instant case, the learned Judge, ESI Court has misconstrued the show cause notices issued by the authority as the first-time claim and computed the limitation period from such notices. 11. Further from the perusal of Section 75(g) of the Act of 1948, it is evident that the employer can challenge the determination order in the ESI Court subject to a deposit of a certain amount and subject to the limitation period as prescribed in Section 77 of the said Act of 1948. 12. In my considered opinion, for challenging the order passed under Section 45A of the Act of 1948 the limitation period commences from the date of determination or the receipt of such an order. 12. In my considered opinion, for challenging the order passed under Section 45A of the Act of 1948 the limitation period commences from the date of determination or the receipt of such an order. Therefore, in light of the above observation, the impugned order dated 24.05.2022 is set aside and the ESI Court is directed to restore the application filed under Section 75(g) of the Act of 1948 as well as the Limitation Act and to decide the applications strictly following the law. 13. The parties are directed to appear before the concerned Court on 10.07.2023. 14. The record be sent to the concerned Court forthwith. 15. With the above directions, the present misc. appeal stands disposed of.