By way of this order, I intend to dispose off aforesaid-captioned
appeals. These appeals involve similar question of law in the background of
identical set of facts.
1 of 9
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:145543
other connected cases
2. For brevity, the facts are being culled out from from FAO
No.1112 of 1988.
3. Instant appeal is directed against judgment dated 26th of August,
2022 passed by Sub Judge, 1st Class, Phagwara exercising powers as ESI
Court under ESI Act, 1948 whereby the petition filed under Section 75-78 of
the ESI Act, 1948 by the respondent has been allowed.
4. Recovery certificate under Section 45-A was issued and
attachment proceedings were initiated against the respondent through
Assistant Collector 2nd Grade, Phagwara for recovery of Rs.6690-95 paise.
Respondent challenged the demand before ESI Court. It was claimed that
the demand raised by the ESI Corporation was based on adhoc assessment
without any survey. The demand has been raised w.r.t. 132 KV Sub Station,
Phagwara. The same does not fall within the purview of ESI Act as the
strength of the staff is only three in number. The staff employed for
maintenance like Mali, Sweeper at the Sub Station are on the roles of XEN
D/S and not on the roles of KV Sub Station. It was thus claimed that the
respondent was not liable to pay any amount towards ESI contribution.