http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: M/S OVERSEAS  METAL

DATE OF JUDGMENT26/03/1993

BENCH: KULDIP SINGH (J) BENCH: KULDIP SINGH (J) YOGESHWAR DAYAL (J)

CITATION:  1994 SCC  Supl.  (2) 510

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT: ORDER 1.   Special leave granted. 2.   Respondents  1  to 4 defaulted, as  employers,  in  the payment  of  employees’ State  Insurance  Corporation  dues. Acting under Section 45-B of the Employees’ State  Insurance Act,    the   appellant-Corporation    initiated    recovery proceedings  under the Revenue Recovery Act,  1890  (Central Act).  In the proceedings before the Certificate Officer, an objection  was raised that the necessary court fee  was  not paid by the Corporation and proper verification of the claim was  not made.  Faced with the objections,  the  Corporation requested  the Certificate Officer to allow the recovery  to be  made under the Bengal Public Demands Recovery Act,  1913 (State Act).  The Certificate Officer disallowed the request of the Corporation in the following terms :               "The  ESI Corporation begins with the  Revenue               Recovery  Act to avoid ad valorem  court  fees               and  verification and then enjoys  the  switch               over  to  the Bengal Public  Demands  Recovery               Act.  This comes under the category of  ’fraud               upon the statute’." 3.   The Corporation challenged the order of the Certificate Officer by way of writ petition before the High Court  which was  dismissed.  This appeal by the Corporation  is  against the judgment of the High Court. 4.   We  have  heard  learned  counsel  for  the  appellant- Corporation.  We have been taken through the judgment of the High  Court  and  the  relevant part of  the  order  of  the Certificate  Officer  as  reproduced in  the  special  leave petition.   We are of the view that the Certificate  Officer was  patently  in  error in rejecting  the  request  of  the Corporation to initiate recovery proceedings under the State Act.   The Corporation could initiate  recovery  proceedings either  under the Central Act or under the State  Act.   The requisition  under  the Central Act being a  public  demand, there was no legal difficulty in allowing the  Corporation’s

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

request to switch over the proceedings under the State  Act. We are of the view that the Collector should have  exercised its  discretion  to allow the proceedings  to  be  continued under the State Act. 5.   We  therefore allow the appeal, set aside the order  of the  High Court, allow the writ petition of the  Corporation filed  before the High Court and set aside the order of  the Certificate Officer.  No costs. 512