/ IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 25154 OF 2024 Between: Bodi Suresh. S/o. Ramanarao, Aged 41 years, R/o. 29-280/1, Kondi Setty Vari Street, Kondapalli, N.T.R. District, Andhra Pradesh Stat ...Petitioner AND 1. The Union of India, Ministry of Labour and Employment, Shram Sakhti Bhavan, Rafi Marg, New-Delhi. 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Industries and Commerce Rep by its Principal Secretary, Velagapudi, Amaravati. 3. Employees State Insurance Corporation, Rep by its Director, Office at ESI Road, Gunadala, Vijayawada-520004, N.T.R District. 4. The Assistant Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation Office at ESI Road, Gunadala, Vijayawada, N.T.R District. 5. The Andhra Pradesh Heavy Machinery and Engineering Limited, Rep by its Managing Director, Kondapalli-521228, N.T.R District ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court be pleased to issue a writ order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 4th respondent in may issuing impugned order u/s. 45-A of the ESI Act, 1948, vide proceedings Np,, 62/AP/ROA/JA/INS- 111/62000395110000999, dated 06/09/2024, directing the petitioner herein to pay an amount of Rs. 5,26,680/- (Rupees Five lakhs Twenty-Six Thousand Six Hundred and Eighty Only) as illegal, arbitrary, improper, unjust, unreasonable, against the principles of natural justice, without application of mind and against the Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the impugned order u/s. 45-A of the ESI Act, 1948, vide proceedings No. 62/AP/ROA/JA/INS- 111/62000395110000999, dated 06/09/2024. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the impugned order u/s. 45-A of the ESI Act, 1948, vide proceedings No. 62/AP/ROA/JA/iNS-l11/6200039511000099 9, dated 06/09/2024. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. KILARU NITHIN KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent No. 1: SRI PASALA PONNA RAO, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No. 2: GP FOR INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4: SRI URP SRINIVAS The Court made the following order: % APHC010482402024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] f FRIDAY ,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 25154/2024 Between: Bodi Suresh ...PETITIONER AND The Union Of India and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KILARU NITHIN KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent(S): I.U.R.P. SRINIVAS 2.GP FOR INDUSTRIES COMMERCE 3. The Court made the following: :: ORDER:: Heard Sri B. Pavan, learned counsel representing Sri Kilaru Nithin Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri B. Hemanth Kumar, learned counsel for Central Government for respondent No.1; Sri U.R.P. Srinivas, learned standing counsel for respondents 3 and 4 and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Industries for respondent No.2. SRS, W.P.No.25154of 2. Impugning the proceedings issued by respondent No.4 vide NO.62/AP/ROA/JA/INS-II1/62000395110000999 dated 06.09.2024 under Section 45-A of the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948, (‘ESI Act’) the above writ petition is filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that before the order impugned was passed by respondent No.4, no notice was served on the petitioner. 4. Learned standing counsel for respondents 3 and 4, on the other hand, would submit that notices dated 24.07.2024 and 13.08.2024 were issued to the petitioner, fixing the dates of hearing on 12.08.2024 and 04.09.2024, respectively. The petitioner, having received the notices, failed to attend the enquiry. Hence, the authority passed the order, impugned in the writ petition, 06.09.2024. He would further submit that an effective and alternative remedy under Section 45-AA of the ESI Act is available to the petitioner. However, the petitioner, without availing the remedy, filed the above writ petition. 3. on As seen from the proceedings impugned, the petitioner, as employer, failed to pay contributions as per the ESI Act, for the period from 01.08.2019 to 30.04.2024. Therefore, a show cause notice dated 03.07.2024 was issued in Form C-18, calling for explanation. Thereafter, a notice dated 24.07.2024 was issued to the petitioner, indicating the date of hearing as 12.08.2024. However, there was neither a representation nor a reply filed on behalf of the petitioner. The authority, to provide one more opportunity, issued a notice dated 13.08.2024 indicating the date of hearing as 04.09.2024. None appeared for the petitioner on the said date. Based on the material on record, the order impugned in the writ petition was passed. Section 45-AA of the ESI Act prescribes the appellate authority. Against order passed under Section 45-A of the ESI Act, a person aggrieved can file an appeal before the appellate authority within sixty days from the date of an 5. 6. an SRS,J W.P.No.25154 of 2024 said order, after depositing 25% of the contribution so ordered or the contribution as per its calculation, whichever is higher, with the Corporation. The proviso to Section 45-AA clarifies that if the employer succeeds in the appeal, the Corporation shall refund such deposit to the employer together with such interest as per regulation. 7. In the case at hand, as noted supra, despite service of notices, the petitioner failed to attend the enquiry, and the order impugned is passed after considering the material on record. The petitioner, without availing of the effective remedy, filed the above writ petition. 8. No doubt, a writ petition can be maintained in case the authority failed to adhere to the procedure under the ESI Act or the order is passed in violation of principles of natural justice. However, as seen from Ex.P1, the proceedings, the authority adhered to the procedure. 9. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner will file an appeal before the appellate authority. 10. Given the facts and circumstances of the case and the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage, with the consent of learned counsel on either side, giving liberty to file an appeal before the appellate authority within three weeks from today. Since the petitioner filed the above writ petition on 28.10.2024, within sixty days from the date of the order passed by respondent No.4, the authority shall consider the same while computing the limitation. No costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/-KTATA RAO deputy REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Union of India, Ministry of Labour and Employment, Shram Sakhti Bhavan, Rafi Marg, New-Delhi. 2. The Principal Secretary, State of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Industries and Commerce, Velagapudi, Amaravati. 3. The Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Office at ESI Road, Gunadala, Vijayawada-520004, N.T.R District. 4. The Assistant Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation Office at ESI Road, Gunadala, Vijayawada, N.T.R District. 5. The Managing Director, Andhra Pradesh Heavy Machinery and Engineering Limited, Kondapalli-521228, N.T.R District 6. One CC to Sri. Kilaru Nithin Krishna Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to Sri. U R P Srinivas Advocate [OPUC] 8. One CC to Sri. Pasala Ponna Rao, Deputy Solicitor General of India [OPUC] 9. Two CCs to GP for Industries and Commerce, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 10. Three CD Copies GSC HIGH COURT DATED:20/06/2025 ORDER WP.N0.25154of 2024 DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS