HOTEL ARVIND Vs. REGIONAL DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner by this writ petition has challenged its converge under the provisions of Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'ESI Act'). Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that upon survey conducted by the authorities under the ESI Act, a representation was made to the Assistant Director, ESI Corporation vide Annex-7 dated 29.04.2010 contending therein that for the reasons given in said representation, the petitioner was not liable to be covered under the provisions of the said Act. Thereupon, Annex-8 order dated 09.07.2010 was sent to the petitioner by the Assistant Director, ESI Corporation, Jodhpur calling upon the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 44,415/- in respect of ESI contributions of its employees for the period 18.07.2008 to 31.07.2009. In the said order issued under Section 45-A of ESI Act dated 09.07.2010, the concerned authority has observed that they have considered the representation of the petitioner-company on the basis of material available on record and the petitioner's unit was found to be covered under the provisions of ESI Act and, therefore, said sum was determined and asked to be paid by the petitioner-company.

(3.) The said order was passed under the provisions of Section 45-A of the Act, which is reproduced hereunder: 45A. Determination of contributions in certain cases: (1) Where in respect of a factory or establishment no returns, particulars, registers or records are submitted, furnished or maintained in accordance with the provisions of Section 44 or any Inspector or other official of the Corporation referred to in sub-Section (2) of Section 45 is [prevented in any manner] by the principal immediate employer or any other person, in exercising his functions or discharging his duties under section 45, the Corporation may, on the basis of information available to it, by order, determine the amount of contributions payable in respect of the employees of that factory or establishment: Provided that no such order shall be passed by the Corporation unless the principal or immediate employer or the person in charge of the factory or establishment has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. (2) An order made by the Corporation under subItem section (1) shall be sufficient proof of the claim of the Corporation under Section 75 or for recovery of the amount determined by such order as an arrear of land revenue under section 45B [or the recovery under sections 45C to 45-I]".