(1.) THE Appellant is before this Court assailing the order dated 3103.2005 passed in E.S.I. No. 48/2004.
(2.) THE Appellant herein was the applicant before the E.S.I. Court the order passed by tilt E.S.I. Corporation covering the Appellant establishment with retrospective effect from 26.11.1996 was -called in question before the E.S.I. Court. After considering the rival contentions, the E.S.I. Court had dismissed the application. The applicants before the E.S.I. Court are therefore before this Court assailing the said order.
(3.) THE Respondents however seek to justify their action as also the order passed by the E.S.I. Court, Firstly, it is contended that the present appeal under Section 82(2) could be maintained only if there is substantial question of law and the fact of coverage and the Act being applicable to the area wherein the establishment is situate is a factual aspect, which had been determined by the E.S.I. Court and therefore, this Court cannot consider that aspect of the matter in the present appeal. Even otherwise, it is contended that the applicability in any event cannot be in dispute in as much as the Appellants themselves had sought for coverage of the area. However, at the first instance, it had not been accepted by the Respondents since there was no clear indication with regard to the bifurcation of the area, and subsequently, when it was ascertained that the establishment in the area was covered. As such, the order passed by the E.S.I. Court is justified and the same does not call far interference.