JUDGMENT

Heard Sri.P.U. Shailajan, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the Employees State Insurance Corporation.

2. As against Ext.P2 order, fixing the liability of the petitioner under the provisions of the ESI Act, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 2^nd respondent herein. By the impugned order at Ext.P10 dated 29.08.2022, the Appellate Authority having rejected the appeal, the petitioner is before this Court.

3. A reading of Ext.P10 order would show that the appeal has been rejected on 28.08.2022, only because there was no appearance on the side of the petitioner when the appeal was posted for hearing. However, the order states further that one Madan Mohan had informed that he was not keeping well and therefore, he would not be in a position to produce the documents. In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the rejection of the appeal without hearing the appellant was without any justification. The Appellate Authority ought to have extended at least one more opportunity for the appellant to produce the connected records in support of the contentions raised before the 2^nd respondent.

In such circumstances, this writ petition wou