AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard the parties.
A recovery proceeding was initiated against the appellant for the recovery of Rs. 89,601/- under the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948. In execution of the said order, certain attachments were made u/s 45C of the Act. However, the authority took recourse u/s 45G of the Act and attached the bank account. The said order of the attachment of bank account was challenged by the appellant in CWJC No. 287 of 2001. The learned single judge dismissed the writ petition on 21.2.2003 holding that the respondents were justified in applying Section 45G of the Act in issuing the order of attachment of bank account.
Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant assailed the judgment of the learned Single Judge on the ground that one recourse has been taken u/s 45C of the Act and moveable properties have been attached the amount could have been realized only by auction sale of those attached properties and recourse to Section 45G of the Act was not justified.
We are not able to accept the submission of the learned counsel. Section 45G of the Act confers power upon the authority to take recourse to the attachment of bank account for the recovery of dues notwithstanding the issuance of certificate u/s 45C of the said Act.
In our view, therefore, learned Single Judge is correct in holding that recourse taken by the respondent-authority u/s 45G of the Act was justified.
This appeal is dismissed.
Needless to say that if the amount has been fully paid by the appellant then the Authority shall release the moveable property from attachment.