FAO No.271/2005 Page 1 of 2 UNREPORTABLE * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO No.271/2005 Date of Decision: May 12, 2010 M/S SUNSHINE PROCESS ..... Appellant through Mr. Ankit Jain, Advocate with Mr. Rahul Bakshi, Advocate versus DIRECT.GEN.ESI CORPN. & ORS ..... Respondents through Mr. K.P.Mavi, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE REKHA SHARMA 1. Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the ‘Digest’? No REKHA SHARMA, J. (ORAL) This appeal has been preferred against the order of Senior Civil Judge, Shri Dayaprakash dated September 07, 2005 directing the appellant to deposit 50% of the impugned demand raised by the ESIC. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the said order has been passed without considering the application filed by the appellant under the proviso of Section 75(2B) of the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the ESI Act). The proviso, it may be noted, empowers the Court to waive or reduce the amount to be deposited under Section 75(2B) of the ESI Act subject to reasons to be recorded in writing. FAO No.271/2005 Page 2 of 2 Having regard to the fact that no order has been passed on the application of the appellant as aforementioned, I direct the trial Court to consider the application of the appellant and pass an appropriate order thereon after hearing the parties. The parties are directed to appear before the ESI Court on July 12, 2010. The trial Court is directed to dispose of the application within three months from the said date. With this direction, the appeal is disposed of. REKHA SHARMA, J. MAY 12, 2010 ka