IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6903 of 2002 1. VINAYAK MICA EXPORT CO. BENGABAD RAOD, VILLAGE SIHODIH, P.S. MUFFASIL THANA, REVENUE THANA NO.45, DISTRICT GIRIDIH, JHARKHAND, THROUGH ITS MANAGER BALKRISHAN SHARMA SON OF LATE MANGALCHAND SHARMA 2. RAJA RAM SARAF SON OF SRI MAMRAJ SARAF, PARTNER, VINAYAK MICA EXPORT CO. BENGABAD ROAD, VILLAGE SIHODIH, P.S. MUFFASIL THANA, REVENUE THANA NO.45, DISTRICT GIRIDIH, JHARKHAND 3. MANRAJ SHARAF SON OF LT. G.L. SARAF, PARTNER, VINAYAK MICA EXPORT CO. BENGABAD ROAD, VILLAGE SIHODIH, P.S. MUFFASIL THANA, RENENUE THANA NO.45, DISTRICT GIRIDIH, JHARKHAND ……PETITIONERS. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION, BIHAR & JHARKHAND, PANCHDEEP BHAWAN, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU MARG, PATNA THROUGH ITS REGIONAL DIRECTOR 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION, BIHAR & JHARKHAND, PANCHDEEP BHAWAN, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU MARG, PATNA- 800001 4. THE RECOVERY OFFICER, EMPLOYEES STATE INSRUANCE CORPORATION, BIHAR & JHARKHAND, PANCHDEEP BHAWAN, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU MARG, PATNA- 800001 …………RESPONDENTS. ----------- For the Petitioners : Mr. Alok Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Indrajee Bhushan, Advocate Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate For Respondent Nos.2 to 4: Mr.Arun Shrivastava, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rabindra Kr.Priyadarshi, A.C.to A.A.G.III ---------- 5. 4.5.2009 Heard Mr. Alok Kumar Sinha, learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Counsel for the Employees State Insurance Corporation as also learned Counsel for the State. In this writ application, an order passed on 24.08.2001 under Section 45A of the Employees’ State Insurance Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) has been assailed by the petitioners directly before this Court without exhausting statutory remedy under Section 75(1)(g) of the Act 2 in E.S.I. Court at Ranchi primarily on the ground that the area, in which the said industry is situated, is beyond the coverage area of the Act. A counter affidavit has been filed wherein the respondents have raised a question of territorial jurisdiction with regard to maintainability of this writ application in Patna High Court on the ground such order is appealable under Section 75(1)(g) before E.S.I. Court at Ranchi and the appropriate High Court in terms of Section 82 of the Act would be Jharkhand High Court. It is not in doubt that the order passed under Section 45A of the Act in the first instance has to be made subject matter of a proceeding under Section 75(1) (g) of the Act which would lie only before the competent E.S.I.court. It is also not in doubt that this writ application came to be filed in 2002 assailing the order dated 24.8.2001. Such competent Court at Ranchi was very much in existence as would appear from Annexure 8 to the writ application. That apart the industry is admittedly situated at village Shihodih in Giridih district of the State of Jharkhand and merely because its assessment under Section 45A of the Act was made at Patna on 24.8.2001, the High Court which will have the jurisdiction to review such an order in terms of Section 82(2) of the Act would not be Patna High Court but only the Jharkhand High Court at Ranchi in existence since 14.11.2000 3 in terms of in terms of Bihar Re-organisation Act 2000, as is clear from the scheme of the Act under Section 82(2) of the Act wherein every order passed by the E.S.I.Court is appealable before the concerned High Court and that too not by a writ but by an appeal. That being so, this court is fully satisfied that the device adopted by the petitioners by filing this writ application was to circumvent its remedy, with a calculated design to over come with the statutory requirement of moving the concerned E.S.I.Court at Ranchi and thereafter the concerned High Court also at Ranchi. After this order has been passed, Mr. Alok Kumar Sinha, learned Counsel for the petitioners would submit that he may be permitted to withdraw this application with liberty to move before the E.S.I.Court at Ranchi against the impugned order. That being so, this writ application is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforementioned liberty. In order to enable the petitioners to approach E.S.I.Court at Ranchi, the petitioners are given a period of two months from today to obtain appropriate order whereafter the respondents shall be at liberty to take appropriate coercive steps for realization of the amount. Narendra/ ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J. )