An appeal against recovery proceedings under the E.S.I. Act is not maintainable without first challenging the correctness of the preceding order under Section 45-A.

JUDGMENT :

1. This Memorandum of Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 82 of Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short ‘E.S.I. Act’) assailing the order passed in E.I.C.No.57 of 2008, dated 24.11.2015 by the Employees Insurance Court and Chairman, Industrial Tribunal-I at Hyderabad.

2. Appellants are the respondent Nos.1 to 3, respondent No.1 is the petitioner, respondent No.2 is the respondent No.4 in E.I.C. No.57 of 2008.

3.1. Respondent No.1-petitioner has filed petition under Section 75 (1) (g) of E.S.I. Act against the appellants -respondent Nos.1 to 3 and respondent No.2-respondent No.4 to declare that the action of the Corporation is illegal, unjust, contrary to law and also in violation of principles of natural justice by setting aside Section 45 -G Prohibitory Order bearing No.520.Q/0106-03, dated 28.02.2006 passed by respondent No.3 therein (appellant No.3 herein) and consequent order No.52-Q/0106-03, dated 13.10.2008 passed by respondent No.1 therein (appellant No.1 herein) by declaring them as illegal, unjust and contrary to law and consequently declare that the petitioner (respondent No.1 herein) is not liable to pay any contribution as demanded by the respondent Corporation.

3.2. Respondent No.1-petitioner stated in the petition that Osmania University, Hyderabad is an Autonomous Institution and a creature of Statute and funded by Government of Andhra Pradesh which has its own Department of Publication and Press. The salaries of the employees of the Department of Publication and Press are paid by Respondent No.1-petitioner out of the block grant received from Government of Andhra Pradesh. The medical facility to the employees is provided through its own dispensary. The employees are provided medical leave on a half pay @ 20 days for every completed year of service and all the employees of the Department of Publication and Press are drawing a salary of more than Rs.6,500/- per month and thus the respondent No.1- petitioner is not coverable under the provisions of the E.S.I. Act. The respondent No.1-petitioner was exempted by Government of Andhra Pradesh through G.O.Rt.No.679, dated 05.05.1992 from the purview of E.S.I. Act provisions for the period from 01.04.1960 to 31.03.1993. The request of respondent No.1-petitioner for exemption of further period is pending consideration with the Government. Pensionary benefits and other benefits of Non-Gazetted Officers of Government of Andhra Pradesh are extended to the employees of the Department of Publication and Press. The corporation served a Prohibitory Order on respondent No.2- respondent No.4 directing it to recover a sum of Rs.21,96,259/- including interest up to 15.10.2008 from the account of the Department of Publication and Press and remit the same to the Corporation. The Director of Department of Publication and Press is not in a position to pay the salaries to its employees. There are 69 employees in the Department and they are drawing a salary of more than Rs.6,500/- per month and thus the action of respondent Nos.1 to 3 (appellants herein) in covering the said Department under the purview of the Act is illegal and arbitrary. The Corporation has not afforded opportunity to respondent No.1- petitioner before initiating proceedings under the provisions of E.S.I. Act.

4. Appellant Nos.1 and 2-respondent Nos.1 and 2 filed common written statement and contended that petition is not maintainable both on facts and law. Respondent No.1-petitioner is covered under the E.S.I. Act with code No.52-0106-03. The Government of Andhra Pradesh granted exemption under Section 90 r/w 91-A of the Act from 01.04.1960 to 31.03.1993 only. Respondent No.1-