Gujarat High Court Dismisses ESIC Appeal in ESI Act Assessment Case for Violation of Natural Justice. Failure to Supply Revenue Inspector's Report Before Section 45A Order Renders Assessment Void.

High Court: Gujarat High Court In Favour of Accused
  • 127
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The Employees' State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) filed appeals under Section 82 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, challenging a common judgment of the ESI Court, Ahmedabad, which allowed applications filed by AIA Engineering Limited and set aside a notice in Form C-18 dated 21.09.2006 and an order under Section 45A of the Act dated 10.10.2007. The ESIC alleged that the respondent-company engaged contractual workers but failed to submit ESI contributions and maintain separate records. Before passing the Section 45A order, the ESIC supplied a copy of the Revenue Inspector's report to the employer. The ESI Court found that the copy of the report was not supplied, violating principles of natural justice, and set aside the order. The High Court held that the finding of fact by the ESI Court regarding non-supply of the report was final and not open to challenge in an appeal under Section 82, which lies only on substantial questions of law. The appeals were dismissed, affirming the ESI Court's order.

Headnote

A) Employees' State Insurance - Section 45A Assessment - Natural Justice - ESI Act, 1948, Section 45A - ESIC passed assessment order under Section 45A without supplying copy of Revenue Inspector's report to employer - Held that failure to supply report violates principles of natural justice and renders order void - ESI Court rightly set aside the order (Paras 4-10).

B) Employees' State Insurance - Appeal under Section 82 - Scope - ESI Act, 1948, Section 82 - Appeal lies only on substantial question of law - Finding of fact by ESI Court regarding non-supply of report is final and not open to challenge in appeal under Section 82 (Paras 11-15).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the order passed under Section 45A of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, without supplying the copy of the Revenue Inspector's report to the employer, is sustainable in law.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The High Court dismissed all four appeals, upholding the ESI Court's order setting aside the C-18 notice and the Section 45A assessment order.

Law Points

  • Natural justice
  • Section 45A ESI Act
  • 1948
  • Section 75 ESI Act
  • Section 82 ESI Act
  • ESI Revenue Manual
  • C-18 notice
  • assessment of contributions
  • contractual workers
  • opportunity of hearing
  • violation of principles of natural justice
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (GUJ) (02) 823

R/First Appeal No. 4701 of 2023 with R/First Appeal No. 4702 of 2023 with R/First Appeal No. 4703 of 2023 with R/First Appeal No. 4704 of 2023

2026-02-12

M. K. Thakker

2026:GUJHC:13501

Mr. Sachin D. Vasavada for the Appellant, Mr. Devang Nanavati assisted by Mr. Vandan Baxi for the Respondent

Employees State Insurance Corporation

AIA Engineering Limited

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal under Section 82 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 against order of ESI Court setting aside Section 45A assessment order.

Remedy Sought

ESIC sought to set aside the ESI Court's order allowing the employer's application and quashing the C-18 notice and Section 45A order.

Filing Reason

ESIC alleged that the employer failed to submit ESI contributions for contractual workers and failed to maintain separate records.

Previous Decisions

ESI Court, Ahmedabad, allowed ESI Application No. 111 of 2007 and set aside the C-18 notice dated 21.09.2006 and the Section 45A order dated 10.10.2007.

Issues

Whether the ESI Court's finding that the Revenue Inspector's report was not supplied to the employer is a finding of fact and not open to challenge in appeal under Section 82? Whether the order under Section 45A passed without supplying the report violates principles of natural justice?

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant (ESIC) argued that a copy of the Revenue Inspector's report was supplied to the employer before passing the Section 45A order. Respondent (Employer) contended that no copy of the report was supplied, and the order was passed in violation of natural justice.

Ratio Decidendi

The finding of fact by the ESI Court that the Revenue Inspector's report was not supplied to the employer is final and cannot be re-agitated in an appeal under Section 82 of the ESI Act, which lies only on substantial questions of law. Non-supply of the report violates principles of natural justice, rendering the Section 45A order void.

Judgment Excerpts

The present appeal is filed under Section 82 of the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948... The learned Court allowed the application and set aside the notice issued under Form C-18 dated 21.09.2006, as well as the order passed under Section 45A of the Act dated 10.10.2007.

Procedural History

ESIC issued C-18 notice on 21.09.2006 and passed Section 45A order on 10.10.2007. Employer filed ESI Application No. 111 of 2007 before ESI Court, Ahmedabad, which allowed the application on 31.08.2023. ESIC filed four First Appeals under Section 82 of the Act in 2023, which were heard and dismissed by common judgment on 12.02.2026.

Acts & Sections

  • Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948: Section 45A, Section 75, Section 82
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Union of India in Age Determination of High Court Judge Under Article 217(3) Constitution — Reverses High Court's Quashing of President's Order. President's decision based on Chief Justice of India's advice after disclosure of...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal by Secured Creditor IDBI in Company Petition for Oppression and Mismanagement — Upholds CLB Order Refusing Interim Relief. Court holds that a secured creditor cannot maintain a petition under Sections 397 and 398 ...