HINDUSTAN ZINC LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The petitioner, which is a Public Limited Company, has filed this writ petition apart from pursuing the regular remedy provided to it under the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (in short "the Act") inter alia on the ground that the condition imposed under Section 75 (2-B) of the Act of 1948 for availing the right of remedy against the claim laid by ESI Corporation is unreasonably onerous and renders the aggrieved party's right seeking adjudication of its application illusory. The contention is that, even if, the Corporation raises an unreasonably high-pitched demand towards contribution to be made to it by the employer in breach of principles of natural justice or which is not otherwise sustainable in law against the entrepreneur, still the aggrieved party cannot avail the right of making application unless it deposits 50% of illegal demand with the Corporation.

(3.) Shri N.M. Lodha, learned counsel for Union of India, states that right to challenge the order of Corporation before any forum for being reviewed is not an inherent right as a right to file suit, but is akin to right of appeal, which depends upon the scheme of the Statute. That being so, right if it is hedged with certain 2 condition, such right has to be accepted with such condition.