UTKAL POLYWEAVE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. Vs. REGIONAL DIRECTOR, EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed, inter alia, to quash the notice dated 17.11.1998, vide Annexure-1, issued by the Recovery Officer, Employees' State Insurance Corporation, Bhubaneswar, opposite party no.3, prohibiting the petitioner to withdraw the amount from Vijaya Bank, Balasore and restraining the said Bank from making any payment to the petitioner. By the said notice the Bank was also directed to transfer an amount of Rs.35,621/- to the Employees' State Insurance Fund Account No.1 of the E.S.I. Corporation, Regional Office, Bhubaneswar within seven days from the date of receipt of the order, failing which, opposite party no.3 would take further proceedings to recover the amount due from the Bank as per Rule 36(3)(b) of the Income Tax (Certificate Proceedings) Rules, 1962.

(2.) Shorn of unnecessary details, the short facts of the case of the petitioner are that it is a Private Limited Company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956. The petitioner company is engaged in the manufacturing and selling of HDPE Woven Sacks Fabrics and Tapes. The petitioner company has employed number of persons in its industries. It regularly deposits the ESI contribution from time to time. While the matter stood thus, on 21.9.1995 it received the demand notice issued by the opposite party no.3 in respect of contribution pertaining to the period from March, 1987 to June, 1990 and thereafter upto 31.7.1995 amounting to Rs.31,905/-. On 18.12.1995, the petitioner made a representation to the Regional Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Bhubaneswar, opposite party no.1, stating therein that the verification report by the ESI authorities basing on the determination of contribution made, had not been supplied to the petitioner. A request was made to give a chance to the petitioner to produce its records and afford personal hearing, vide Annexure-2. Finally reminder was sent on 9.3.1996, vide Annexure-3.

(3.) Further case of the petitioner is that on 7.9.1996, it received a notice from opposite party no.3. In the said notice, the petitioner was directed to appear before him on 13.9.1996 for making payment of the certificate amount, failing which, the opposite party no.3 would proceed to recover the amount through coercive measure. On 31.5.1997, the petitioner received another letter from the Deputy Director (Revenue), Employees State Insurance Corporation, Bhubaneswar, opposite party no.2, refusing to afford the personal hearing and directed the petitioner to deposit the amount due as per the certificate issued. It is further stated that on 21.11.1998 when the petitioner went to Bijaya Bank for operating the bank account, he was refused to do so and informed that prohibitory order has been received from opposite party no.3 for not allowing him to withdraw any amount from the account, vide Annexure-1.