H.K. Rathod, J.—Heard learned Advocate Mr. Sachin D. Vasavada for the petitioner and Mr. Dipak R. Dave, learned Advocate for the respondent.

2. Rule. Service is Rule is waived by learned Advocate Mr. D.R. Dave for the respondent. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, matter is taken up for final hearing today itself.

3. It is a case of lapses committed by the officer of the petitioner ESI Corporation and, on that basis, petitioner is challenging order passed by the Lok Adalat dated 03.10.2006 in ESI Application No. 23 of 2002. Arguments advanced by the learned Advocate Mr. Vasavada on merits before this Court is totally irrelevant and yet, this Court has permitted him to argue on merits of the matter. Against the order passed by the Lok Adalat, appeal is not available. That is the view taken by the Hon’ble Apex Court. Limited scope to challenge the order passed in Lok Adalat. Writ petition before the High Court is limited remedy. Contention raised by the ESI Corporation is that the Insurance Inspector is not authorised to settle the matter with the respondent. How the respondent will be aware about this fact that the Insurance Inspector is not authorised. The a