IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA APPEAL UNDER E.S.I. NO. 5 OF 2008 EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION THROUGH REGIONAL DIRECTOR ... Appellant Versus SANDHYA CAFE ... Respondent Ms. A. A. Agni, Advocate for the Appellant. Mr. E.O. Mendes, Advoate for the Respondent. Coram:- N. A. BRITTO, J. Date:- 7th August, 2008 P.C. Heard learned Counsel on behalf of both the parties. Counsel on behalf of the appellant submits that the impugned Judment dated 25.10.2007 is not in consonance with the directions given by this Court by Order dated 21.2.2007 in Appeal Under E.I.A. No.3/2001. Learned Counsel on behalf of the respondent does not dispute the submission made but further submits that in case the submission is correct, the matter could be decided by this Court. In terms of para 2 of the Oral Judgment dated 21.2.2007 the learned E.S.I Court, Margao was required to render a finding whether the respondent's establishment was using cooking gas and such use amounted to using the power, as defined under the E.S.I. Act. There is no such finding rendered in the impugned Judgment. In view of the above, impugned Order deserves to be set aside with a direction to the learned E.S.I. Court to render a finding in the light of the observation made by this Court. N. A. BRITTO, J. cg