High CourtsSingle Bench(2008) 11 MAD CK 0075

GDA Technoligies Ltd. vs The Deputy Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation

Madras High Court · Decided on 13 November 2008

HON’BLE JUDGES
M. Jaichandren, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 3328 of 2003

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

18 paragraphs · 355 words

M. Jaichandren, J.—This writ petition has been filed praying for a writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the respondent, bearing No.

TN/Ins-III/51-77136-66/2720/02, dated 31.12.2002, and quash the same.

2.

The main contention raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that Section 45A of the Employees'' State Insurance Act, 1948, is not

applicable to the petitioner Company, since it is a computer company, employing only 7 employees, drawing a salary of Rs. 6500/- and above.

Further, the learned Counsel had submitted that the reply, dated 9.1.2003, submitted by the petitioner Company, to the show cause notice, dated

14.3.2002, had not been considered by the respondent.

3.

The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent had submitted that the impugned order, dated 31.12.2002, passed by the

respondent, is in accordance with law. However, if the petitioner company is aggrieved by the said order, it is open to the company to challenge

the same by filing an appeal, u/s 75 of the Employees'' State Insurance Act, 1948.

4.

The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has not refuted the statements made by the learned Counsel for the respondent that an

appeal remedy is available to the petitioner, u/s 75 of the Employees'' State Insurance Act, 1948. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner

had submitted that the petitioner may be permitted to file an appeal before the appropriate Court, u/s 75 of the Employees'' State Insurance Act,

1948, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5.

In view of the submissions made by the learned Counsels appearing for the petitioner, as well as the respondent, this Court is of the view that

the petitioner has not shown sufficient cause or reason for this Court to grant the reliefs sought for in the writ petition. However, the petitioner is

permitted to avail the appeal remedy provided, u/s 75 of the Employees'' State Insurance Act, 1948, within a period of four weeks from the date

of receipt of a copy of this order.

The writ petition is disposed of with the above observations. No costs.