RAGHUNANDAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard learned counsel for the respondents no. 2 to 4.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner appears to be that a show cause notice was issued to him by the Employees State Insurance Corporation and he was required to show cause against the recovery. The petitioner says that though he filed his reply but without passing a final order on the subject a recovery certificate has been issued and in execution of the recovery certificate, the petitioner is sought to be arrested. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not answerable to the claim made by the Employees State Insurance Corporation, firstly because he was a minor when the establishment was being run and secondly even after attaining the majority, he had no connection with the said business. Learned counsel for the Corporation submits that in accordance with section 75(1)(g) of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 the petitioner has a remedy to approach the Employees State Insurance Court and if he satisfies the judicial conscience of the said court then the said court may even grant an injunction in favour of the petitioner. He submits that in view of availability of the alternative remedy which is apt and efficacious, the petitioner is not entitled to maintain this writ application.

(3.) AS an alternative speedy and efficacious remedy is available to the petitioner l do not think that this Court should interfere in the matter at this stage. The petitioner is free to approach the proper forum. The apprehension of the petitioner that his life and liberty would be seriously hampered, in the opinion of this Court, is baseless. If he satisfies the Employees State Insurance Court that present is a case where the effect of the certificate should be stayed then in the opinion of this Court, the E.S.I. Court certainly would grant some interim relief in favour of the petitioner.