JUDGMENT :

PRAVEER BHATNAGAR, J.

1. The instant appeal has been filed against the impugned order dated 24.05.2022, whereby, the original application filed by the appellant Institute under Section 75(1)(g) of the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1948’) for declaring the demand letter dated 20.03.2017 issued by the respondent as void, was dismissed by the Employee Insurance Court, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as the ‘ESI Court’) on the grounds of being time-barred while rejecting the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

2. In a nutshell, the appellant preferred an Original Application under Section 75(1)(g) of the Act of 1948 alongwith the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act before the ESI Court questioning the order dated 20.03.2017 of the respondent passed under Section 45A of the Act of 1948, whereby, a sum of Rs.10,51,050/- was determined as a statutory arrear of contribution payable by the Institution for the period from April, 2012 to November, 2016.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the cause of action in respect of the claim by the Corporation for recovering contributions from the principal employer shall be deemed to be reckoned from the date on which such claim is made for the first time as per Section 77(1A)(b) of the Act of 1948. It is further submitted that the limitation period under Section 77(1A) for applying Section 75(g) of the Act of 1948 Act is three years from the date of the cause of action. In the instant case, the order dated 20.03.2017 is a first-time claim raised by the Corporation and the said letter came to the notice of the appellant on 20.05.2017 and the appellant submitted the application under Section 75(g) on 28.10.2020.

4. It is submitted that the learned ESI Court erred in computing the cause of action from the letters dated 29.12.2016 and 31.12.2016, wherein such letters cannot be termed as first-time claims as incorporated in Section 77(1A)(b) of the said Act of 1948. It is further submitted that the letters dated 29.12.2016 and 31.12.2016 were not regarding the determination of the ESI Contribution as required under Section 45A of the Act of 1948. Therefore, the impugned order dated 24.05.2022 be quashed and the concerned ESI Court be directed to decide the original application under Section 75(G) following the law.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant relied on the judgment of Madhya Pradesh High Court in E.S.I. Corporation vs. Depot Manager, MPSRTC, Indore, Misc. Appeal No. 1556/2002, decided on 27.11.2022.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent endorsed the impugned order and relied on the judgments of Allahabad High Court and Madras High Court in Allahabad Canning Company vs. Regional Director, E.S.I.C. 1998 (79) FLR 947, M/s Allahabad Canning Company vs. The Regional Director E.S.I.C. and Others, Special Appeal No. 472/1998, decided on 29.08.2013 and Standard Literature Co. (P) Ltd. vs. Employees’ State Insurance, 2001 (99) FLR 389.

7. Before scrutinizing the substance of the appeal the scheme of the Act of 1948 needs to be described:

“Section 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 subsection (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 b