O R D E R

The petitioner is a company registered under the Company Registration Act, 1958 seeking for the following prayers:

“a) To issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other writ or direction, quashing the Impugned Order dated 28.02.2023 B.No:50000428050001007/ 2282023235 passed by Respondent No.1 under Section 45-A of the ESI Act (Annexure “A”).

b) To issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other writ or direction, quashing the Recovery Certificate dated 18.09.2023 B.No:50000428050001007/9142023305 issued by Respondent No.1 (Annexure “B”).

c) To issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other writ or direction, quashing the Garnishee Order dated 11.12.2023 KAR.CP/50000428050001007 passed by Respondent No.2 under the ESI Act (Annexure “C”).

d) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ or any direction, declaring the Impugned Order dated 28.02.2023 B.No:50000428050001007/2282023235 (Annexure A) as highly arbitrary, illegal and without authority of law.

e) Pass any other order(s) in the facts and circumstances of the case, as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the interests of justice.”

2. The case of the petitioner is that respondent No.1 passed the impugned order under Section 45A of the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 (“the ESI Act” for short) determining an amount of Rs.1,38,55,669/- as arrears of contribution payable by the petitioner under the ESI Act, recovery certificate was issued for the recovery of the total sum of Rs.1,95,89,303/- plus (+) further interest at 12% p.a. Further, the impugned notice of demand to defaulter in Form No.ESI CP2 issued by the Recovery Officer was addressed to the old registered office of the petitioner – company and on 09.11.2023, the notice of demand in Form No.2 ESI CP 2 issued by the Recovery Officer, was hand delivered to the current address of the petitioner.

3. The petitioner, on the notice being served by the Recovery Officer at the current address, appeared before respondent No.1 seeking opportunity to be heard and a written response was sought to be filed, which was refused by respondent No.1 – Authority. The requisition was issued by the petitioner seeking stay of the proceedings under the recovery certificate, in the meanwhile, Garnishee order dated 11.12.2023 was issued under Section 45G of the ESI Act calling upon HDFC Bank, Jayanagar Branch, wherein the petitioner operates account No.50200010166083 to transfer a sum of Rs.2,00,18,100/- forthwith towards the contribution/ interest damages on the contribution.

4. Sri K. Shashi Kiran Shetty, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner being aggrieved by the impugned order and recovery certificate issued, requisition dated 06.12.2023 issued under Section 45F of the ESI Act seeking stay of the proceedings under the recovery certificate, despite the petitioner pointing out the demand raised by respondent No.1 and sought to be recovered by respondent No.2, it is illegal and arbitrary and respondent No.2 issued a Garnishee order dated 11.12.2023 under Section 45G of the ESI Act, notifying to transfer forthwith an amount of Rs.2,00,18,100/-.

5. Learned senior counsel would contend that all the notices leading upto the passing of impugned order under Section 45A of the ESI Act, an issuance of recovery certificate was addressed to the old address of the petitioner- company. Learned senior counsel would contend that, as a matter of fact, the petitioner had vacated the premises way back in the year 2018 and the show-cause notices referred to in the impugned order were purportedly issued in the year 2022-23. Learned senior counsel would contend that the petitioner has a website, which is available at www.affine.ai. The said web page can be accessed from any person in the world having internet connectivity and with every change of the location of the petitioner, the updated information relating to its address was hosted on its website and the address of the company at any given point of time from 2017 till today is ava