[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
M/S. Powell School (English vs Deputy Director (Revenue) .... ... on 31 March, 2026
Author: Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo
Bench: Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.9872 of 2026
M/s. Powell School (English .... Petitioner
Medium), Mayurbhanj
Mr. Somanath Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
Deputy Director (Revenue) .... Opposite Parties
Employees State Insurance
Corporation, Bhubaneswar
and another
CORAM:
JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO
ORDER
31.03.2026
(Hybrid Mode)
Order No.
01. 1. The petitioner, an establishment running English
Medium School at Baripada is before this Court
challenging the order dated 05.07./10.2023
(Annexure-9) passed by the opposite party no.1-
Authority under Section 45-A of the Employees' State
Insurance Act, 1948. Also under challenge is the notice
dated 26.03.2024 issued under Sections 45-C to 45-I
of the ESI Act, 1948 by opposite party no.2-Authority
raising demand of Rs.4,21,113/-.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner refers to
the order dated 05.07./10.2023 and submits that
issuance of the notices is recorded by the authority,
however, regarding sufficiency of notice or otherwise
has not been recorded. It is submitted that the
petitioner-institution through its representative was
never heard in the said proceeding nor had any
occasion to appear and apprise the facts before the
authorities.
The petitioner-institution was provided with copy
of the inspection report of the opposite party-
corporation dated 11.02.2016 copy of which has been
annexed to the writ application marked as Annexure-1.
It is submitted that after the said inspection report
there is no recorded proceeding wherein the petitioner
has been given any opportunity to explain the facts to
the authority regarding applicability of the ESI Act
and to what extent the petitioner is liable. The
petitioner challenges the recovery notice dated
26.03.2024 as well as the order dated 05.07.2023.
3. Issue notice along with this order.
Mr. Amarendra Prasad Ray, learned Standing
Counsel who usually appears for the opposite parties-
authorities being present in the Court shall accept
notice on behalf of the opposite parties.
Adequate number of extra copies of the writ
petition shall be served on Mr. Ray, learned Standing
Counsel during course of the day.
4. The learned Standing Counsel shall file his
Vakalatnama within ten working days. Upon filing of
the Vakalatnama, the name of Mr. Ray and learned
associates shall be reflected in the cause list as well as
the case brief.
The learned Standing Counsel shall also obtain
instruction in response to the submissions made by
the learned counsel for the petitioner.
5. The I.A. has been filed challenging the order
under Section 45-A of the ESI Act raising a demand of
about Rs.6,00,000/-.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterates
his submissions as noted above and prays for interim
stay of operation of the orders dated 05.07./10.2023
and notice dated 26.03.2024.
Issue notice as above.
The learned Standing Counsel shall accept notice
along with the writ application. Adequate number of
extra copies of the petition shall be served on Mr. Ray
during course of the day.
The learned Standing Counsel shall obtain
instruction.
7. In the interim, it is directed that no further action
shall be taken pursuant to the order dated 05.07.2023
(Annexure-9) and the order dated 26.03.2024
(Annexure-4) till the next date of hearing.
8. Urgent certified copy be issued as per rules.
The parties shall have the liberty to act upon the
copy of the order obtain from the official website of this
Court.
9. The matter shall be listed in the week
commencing 04.05.2026.
(Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo)
Judge
jyostna
