Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

M/S K.P. JAIN GLASS WORKS THRU' ITS PARTNER SMT.ANGOORI DEVI versus THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


M/S K.P. Jain Glass Works Thru' Its Partner Smt.Angoori Devi v. The Regional Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation - WRIT - C No. 27423 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 9800 (18 May 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon'ble Vineet Saran,J

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri Rajesh Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

The grievance of the petitioner is that the provisions of the Employees State Insurance Act are sought to be enforced against the petitioner without providing opportunity of hearing. Reliance has been placed on a Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of Employees State Insurance Corporation Versus M/s U.P. Hotel and Restaurant Ltd. 1975 (3) FLR 246 wherein this Court has held that before determining the question as to whether the Act applies to the respondents or not, opportunity ought to be provided to such party. Denial of opportunity amounts to denial of principles of natural justice. It is the categorical case of the petitioner that prior to the passing of the impugned order/notice dated 19.4.2006, no notice had been issued to the petitioner. After the passing of the impugned order, the petitioner has already filed its objections  and has contended that the provisions of the Employees State Insurance Act would not be applicable in the case of the petitioner.

In view of the above, the impugned order/notice dated 19.4.2006 deserves to be quashed and is, accordingly, quashed. The Regional Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Panchdeep Bhawan, Sarvodaya Nagar,  Kanpur Nagar, respondent no. 1 may pass fresh orders in accordance with law after considering the objections of the petitioner. In case if the respondent no. 1 issues notices to the petitioner for personal appearance, the petitioner shall appear and produce all the relevant documents, which may be required by the respondent-authorities.

Subject to the aforesaid directions, this writ petition stands allowed. No order as to costs.

Dt/-18.5.2006

dps

w.p.27423.06


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.