DEPUTY DIRECTOR Vs. LALITHA RAMAKRISHNAN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Does the bar under the second proviso to Section 45A of the Employees' State Insurance Act apply to orders determining the contributions passed pursuant to orders issued by the Employees' Insurance Court, in exercise of the power under Section 75 the said Act, is the common question arising for consideration in these appeals.

(2.) The appeals are preferred by the Employees' State Insurance Corporation ('the Corporation' for short), challenging the decisions in three different applications filed before the Employees' Insurance Court ('the Insurance Court' for short) under Section 75 of the Employees' State Insurance Act ('the Act' for short). The applicants before the Insurance Court were persons running toddy shops.

(3.) Ins.Appeal No.2 of 2015 is preferred against the decision in I.C.No.44 of 2013 on the file of the Employees' Insurance Court, Alappuzha. The contributions payable by the applicants in the said case under the Act in respect of their employees for the period from 1.4.1991 to 31.3.1993 were determined by the Corporation invoking its power under Section 45A of the Act. The order issued by the Corporation was however, set aside by the Insurance Court in I.C.No.42 of 1995. The matter was taken up in appeal by the Corporation before this Court. This Court remitted the matter to the Insurance Court for fresh consideration. On remittance, the Insurance Court allowed the application and directed the Corporation to determine the contributions payable by the applicants afresh. The contributions payable by the applicants were accordingly redetermined by the Corporation as per the order dated 5.4.2013. The order dated 5.4.2013 was challenged by the applicants in I.C.No.44 of 2013 and the said case was allowed by the Insurance Court as per the order impugned in this appeal, holding that the redetermination order passed on 5.4.2013 is hit by the second proviso to Section 45A of the Act.