Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 2787 Cal/2
Judgement Date : 25 September, 2025
OD-3
WPO/676/2025
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
THE SALESIAN PROVINCE OF
CALCUTTA (NORTHERN INDIA)
-VERSUS-
THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND
ORS.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL)
Date : 25th September, 2025.
Appearance:
Mr. Rudrajit Sarkar, Adv.
Mr. Tamoghna Saha, Adv.
Ms. Preksha Manot, Adv.
.... for the petitioner.
Mr. Sirsanya Bandopadhyay, Adv.
Ms. Tapati Samanta, Adv.
...for the State.
Mr. Dipak Mukherjee, Adv.
...for the respondent nos.3- 7.
Mr. Atarup Banerjee, Adv.
Ms. Debjani Ghoshal, Adv.
...for the UoI.
The Court: The writ application has been preferred challenging the
notification No.1381-SSJ2H-6/0S dated 10th February, 2011 and notices and orders
pursuant thereto issued by the Government of West Bengal, Labour Department on
the ground that the said notification is ultra vires to Articles 30, 25, 26, 27 and 29 of
the Constitution of India read with Article 14 thereof and the provisions of Section
1(5) of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948.
It is the contention of the petitioner that the petitioners have earlier
challenged a similar notification issued in respect of the petitioners institution
which was decided by a Single Bench in its order dated 6 th May, 2011 in WP
No.24463(W) of 2007 with other writ applications. The said judgment is now before
the appellate Court wherein the appellate Court has been pleased to consider the
prayer for stay of the petitioners and directed as follows:
"Pending disposal of the appeal, the appellant will be at liberty to take steps for determining the E.S.I. liabilities in respect of the respondent- society although no steps should be taken for realization of the same till disposal of the appeal. We make it clear that in course of taking steps to determine the E.S.I. liability in terms of this order, the appellant should not take any coercive steps against the respondent under any circumstance,"
It is now submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the
respondents have now issued a fresh notification dated 10 th February, 2011. It is
further submitted that the notification is being challenged on similar grounds and
they have come up before this Court on receiving a notice dated 13 th May, 2025
which shows that the respondent authorities have passed an order in a pre-
determined manner. The said notice is also a notice to show cause but prior to that
decision has already been taken by the authorities concerned. Subsequently,
proceedings under Section 45A has been conducted and concluded. It is the case of
the petitioner that the writ application is maintainable as the vires of the
notification has been challenged.
Considering the said facts, the writ application is required to be heard on
affidavits. Let affidavit-in-opposition be filed by 7th November, 2025; reply thereto,
if any, be filed by 28th November, 2025.
Let the matter appear on 4th December, 2025.
Pending hearing of the writ application, the respondent authorities shall
not take any coercive action against the petitioner institutions including any
attachment of bank account or initiating any recovery process.
Considering the challenge of the notification in the present case, the
petitioner is directed to serve a copy of the writ application upon the learned
Advocte-General.
(SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J.)
A.Sadhukhan
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!