The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of exhausting statutory remedies before resorting to writ jurisdiction, as well as the discretionary nature of the remedy of writ under Article 226 of the Constitution.

Mr. Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.

1. The present writ application has been filed on behalf of the petitioners for quashing the show cause notice as contained in C18-Adhoc dated 27.08.2014 (Annexure-1 to the present application) as well as notice as contained in Letter dated 05.11.2014 (Annexure-2 to the present application) issued by the Deputy Director, Employees' State Insurance Corporation (for short 'ESIC'), Patna whereby the petitioner school was asked to show cause for the alleged non-compliance of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short 'ESI Act') for the period 2009-2014. Further, a prayer has been made to set aside the remittance order as contained in Letter dated 16.02.2015 issued by the Revenue Recovery Officer, ESIC whereby and where under a sum of Rs.15,34,915/- has been recovered from the bank account of the petitioner school.

2. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent-ESIC a preliminary objection has been raised regarding maintainability of the writ petition as the petitioners have not exhausted the statutory remedies provided under the ESI Act for the redressal of their grievances.

3. Countering the contentions raised in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the ESIC, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the order dated 31.03.2014 passed by the Deputy Director under Section 45-A of the ESI Act is grossly in violation of the principle of natural justice and the statutory provisions prescribed under the Act and, hence, there would be no bar in entertaining the application under writ jurisdiction.

4. In reply, learned counsel for the respondents-ESIC submitted that there is no truth behind the allegation that the statutory provisions were not complied with before passing the order dated 31.03.2014 whereby arrears of contribution payable by the employer in respect of claim has been determined against the petitioner. He submitted that there is nothing on record on the basis of which it can be said that the principle of natural justice was not followed before passing the order against the petitioner school under Section 45-A of the ESI Act.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. I find substance in the argument of the learned counsel for the respondents-ESIC.

7. The petitioners have a remedy of appeal under Section 45-AA and thereafter remedy lies under Section 75 of the ESI Act before the Employees Insurance Court against an order passed under Section 45-A of the ESI Act.

8. The statutory provisions prescribed under Section 45A and 75 of the ESI Act is reproduced hereunder for ready reference:-

"45A. Determination of contributions in certain cases.- (1) Where in respect of a factory or establishment no returns, particulars, registers or records are submitted, furnished or maintained in accordance with the provisions of section 44 or any Social Security Officer or other official of the Corporation referred to in sub-section (2) of section 45 is prevented in any manner by the principal or immediate employer or any other person, in exercising his functions or discharging his duties under section 45, the Corporation may, on the basis of information available to it, by order, determine the amount of contributions payable in respect of the employees of that factory or establishment:

Provided that no such order shall be passed by the Corporation unless the principal or immediate employer or the person in charge of the factory or establishment has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

Provided further that no such order shall be passed by the Corporation in respect of the period beyond five years from the date on which the contribution shall become payable.

(2) An order made by the Corporation under sub-section (1) shall be sufficient proof of the claim of the Corporation under section 75 or for recovery of the amount determined by such order as an arrear of land revenue under section 45-B or the recovery under section 45-C to section