Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010105072026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2903/2026 GIRISH AGARWAL S/O- SHIV BHAGWAN AGARWAL, RESIDENT OF 2/121, 3RD FLOOR, SUNDER VIHAR, PASCHIM VIHAR, DELHI-110087. 2: RUCHIKA AGARWAL W/O- GIRISH AGARWAL RESIDENT OF 2/121 3RD FLOOR SUNDER VIHAR PASCHIM VIHAR DELHI-110087. 3: MASTER BHAVYA AGARWAL MINOR THROUGH HIS MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN/NEXT FRIEND SMT. RUCHIKA AGARWAL RESIDENT OF 2/121 3RD FLOOR SUNDER VIHAR PASCHIM VIHAR DELHI-110087. PETITIONER NO. 3 THROUGH PETIONER NO. 2 AS MOTHER/NATURAL GUARDIAN/ NEXT FRIEND. 4: MASTER LAVIT AGARWAL MINOR THROUGH HIS MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN/ NEXT FRIEND SMT RUCHIKA AGARWAL RO 2/121 3RD FLOOR SUNDER VIHAR PASCHIM VIHAR DELHI 110087 THROUGH PETITIONER NO 2 AS MOTHER/NATURAL GUARDIAN/NEXT FRIEND Page No.# 2/4 VERSUS EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION AND 5 ORS THROUGH ITS REGIONAL DIRECTOR/ AUTHORISED OFFICER, REGIONAL OFFICE, PANCHDEEP BHAWAN, P.O. BAMUNIMAIDAN, GUWAHATI, ASSAM. 2:THE RECOVERY OFFICER ESIC N. E. REGION OFFICE OF RECOVERY OFFICER/ RECOVERY BRANCH EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION PANCHDEEP BHAWAN REGIONAL OFFICE BAMUNIMAIDAN GUWAHATI- 781021 ASSAM 3:THE AUTHORISED OFFICER OFFICER WHO HAD PASSED THE ALLEGED SECTION 45A ORDER EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION REGIONAL OFFICE/BRANCH OFFICE GUWAHATI/ TINSUKIA ASSAM 4:THE BRANCH MANAGER OFFICER-IN-CHARGE ESIC BRANCH OFFICE TINSUKIA ASSAM 5:HDFC BANK LTD THROUGH ITS NODAL OFFICER/ COMPLIANCE OFFICER/ LEGAL OFFICER REGISTERED OFFICE/ HEAD OFFICE- HDFC BANK HOUSE SENAPATI BAPAT MARG LOWER PAREL (WEST) MUMBAI- 400013 CORPORATE/ ADDITIONAL SERVICE ADDRESS- RAMON HOUSE 169 BACKBAY RECLAMATION H.T. PAREKH MARG CHURCHGATE MUMBAI-400020. 6:THE BRANCH MANAGER HDFC BANK LTD TINSUKIA BRANCH 1ST FLOOR Page No.# 3/4 ARJUN TOWERS CHIRWAPATTY TINSUKIA ASSAM PIN- 786125. 7:THE BRANCH MANAGER HDFC BANK LTD KOHAT ENCLAVE/ CONCERNED DELHI BRANCH DELHI Advocate for the petitioner(s): Mr. D Deka Advocate for the respondent(s): Mr. M Smith Standing Counsel, ESIC B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER 24.07.2026 Heard Mr. D Deka, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M Smith, the learned counsel who appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 to 4. 2. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the action taken by the respondent authorities on the basis of a prohibitory order dated 27.04.2026 issued by the respondent No.2. 3. It is seen that the prohibitory order dated 27.04.2026 is based upon the order dated 29.10.2025 passed under Section 45-A of the ESI Act, 1948. 4. Mr. D Deka, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no copy of the said order dated 29.10.2025 was made available to the petitioner and as Page No.# 4/4 such the petitioner has been compelled to approach this Court. 5. During the course of the hearing Mr. M Smith the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 4 has provided a copy of the order dated 29.10.2025. 6. Mr. M Smith, the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 4 further submits that the petitioner has an alternative remedy under Section 45AA of the ESI Act, 1948. 7. Taking into account that the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy available under the provisions of the ESI Act, 1948, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present writ petition. 8. As this Court has not entertained the instant writ petition on the ground that the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy and further that the learned counsel for the petitioner has been served with the order dated 19.10.2025 only during the course of the hearing, this Court directs that if an appeal under Section 45AA of the ESI Act, 1948 is preferred by the petitioner within a period of 30(thirty) days from today, the said appeal be decided on merits by the Appellate Authority without insisting on the question of limitation. 9. Before parting with the records, this Court further makes it clear that the dismissal of the writ petition on being not entertained shall not prejudice the petitioner in the appeal proceedings, if so preferred, as observed hereinabove. 10. The order dated 29.10.2025 passed by the respondent No.3 is kept on record and marked with the letter ‘X’. JUDGE Comparing Assistant