REGIONAL DIRECTOR Vs. SHAIKH MUSTAFA KADAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Kholkar, learned Counsel, appearing for the Appellant. None for the Respondent, though served.

(2.) The above Appeal came to be admitted by Order dated 21.06.2006, on the following substantial question of law :

(3.) Shri Kholkar, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant, has assailed the impugned Order essentially on the ground that the learned E.S.I. Court whilst disposing of the application challenging an Order under Section 45A filed by the Respondent no.1, disposed of the application directing the Appellant to recover a specific amount of Rs.90,908/- withheld by the Bank and that the Appellant was not entitled to claim any further interest thereon. Learned Counsel has taken me through the Employees State Insurance (General) Regulations 1950, and pointed out that under Regulation 31, there is a specific time limit whereby the employer has to deposit his contribution. Learned Counsel has thereafter taken me through the Regulations 31-A and pointed out that in case of default of such payment, the employer is liable to pay interest at the rate of 15 percent per annum, Learned Counsel further pointed out that the E.S.I. Court has no powers or jurisdiction to waive such amount on statutory interest and, as such, the impugned Order passed by the E.S.I. Court deserves to be quashed and set aside. Learned Counsel has relied upon the Judgment of the Apex Court , in the Goetze vs ESIC, 2008 8 SCC 705. The learned Counsel as such submits that the impugned Order deserves to be quashed and set aside.