Case Note & Summary
The Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging a Notification dated 23 October 2007 issued by the State of Maharashtra granting exemption to Respondent No. 2, Pune Mahila Mandal, from the provisions of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948. The petition was filed on 21 January 2014, nearly seven years after the notification and after the ESI Court, Pune had passed an order on 11 January 2013 in Application (ESI) No. 17 of 2006 filed by Respondent No. 2. The ESI Court had partly allowed the application, setting aside the ESIC's order under Section 45A for the period 5/96 to 3/99, and declaring that the applicant was liable to pay only Rs. 6,002 for the period 5/96 to 4/97, and not liable for the period from 1 May 1997 onwards due to the exemption granted. The ESIC did not challenge the ESI Court order despite the availability of a statutory remedy. The High Court noted that the challenge to the notification was highly belated and that the ESIC had not provided any explanation for the delay. The court observed that while delay alone may not be a ground to dismiss a writ petition, the conduct of the parties and the factual background must be considered. The court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in State of Jammu and Kashmir v. R.K. Zalpuri, which held that courts should take note of delay and laches. The court found that the ESIC had acquiesced in the exemption and the ESI Court order, and therefore, the petition was liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. The writ petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Delay and Laches - Writ Jurisdiction - High Court may refuse to entertain a writ petition if there is unexplained and inordinate delay, especially when the conduct of the petitioner shows acquiescence or waiver - The court must consider the factual background and the aspect of delay while exercising discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India (Paras 3-4). B) Employees State Insurance - Exemption Notification - Power of State Government - Section 87 of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 - The State Government has the power to grant exemption from the provisions of the ESI Act after considering objections - A challenge to such notification after nearly seven years, without any explanation for the delay, is not maintainable (Paras 3-4). C) Employees State Insurance - ESI Court Order - Finality - Section 75 of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 - An order passed by the ESI Court under Section 45A of the Act, if not challenged by way of statutory appeal or revision, attains finality - The ESI Corporation cannot be permitted to indirectly challenge such order through a belated writ petition (Paras 2-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the writ petition challenging the Notification dated 23 October 2007 and the ESI Court order dated 11 January 2013 should be entertained given the inordinate delay and laches on the part of the petitioner.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Delay and laches in filing writ petition
- Power of State Government to grant exemption under ESI Act
- Finality of ESI Court orders not challenged
- Conduct of parties relevant for entertaining delayed petition
