IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT APPEAL NO : 1078 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 05/04/2007 in WP NO : 5004 OF 2007 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1 M/s. E.S.I. Corporation , Rep. by the Regional Manager, 5-9-23, Hill Fort Road, Hyderabad. 2 The Recovery Officer, E.S.I. Corporation, 5-9-23, Hills Fort Road, Hyderabad. 3 The Insurance Inspector, E.S.I. Corporation, Tirupati. 4 The Manager, State Bank of India, Tirupati. ..... APPELLANTS AND 1 M/s. Tirupati Cotton Mills, Renigunta, Chittoor District, Rep. by its Personnel Manager Sri M.V. Rama Rao, R/. Tirupati. 2 The Insurance Inspector , ESI Corporation,Tirupathi 3 The Manager, State Bank of India., Tirupati .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellants: MR.B.G.RAVINDER REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: MR.VEMURIVENKATESWARA RAO The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT APPEAL No.1078 of 2008 ORAL JUDGMENT: (per the HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA) Heard Sri B.G.Ravindra Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, as well as Sri Vemuri Venkateswara Rao, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. The present Writ Appeal is filed by the E.S.I.Corporation, represented by its Regional Manager, and the Recovery Officer of E.S.I. Corporation, who were originally arrayed as respondents 1 and 2 in Writ Petition No.5004 of 2007, challenging the order, dated 05.04.2007, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court, disposing of W.P.M.P.No.8867 of 2007 in the said writ petition, directing them to re-deposit a sum of Rs.4,58,315/- into the bank account of the first respondent herein-writ petitioner forthwith. It is further observed that the recovery of the remaining amount will be subject to the result of Employees Insurance Case and gave liberty to the appellants to file an appeal, as envisaged under Section 75 of the E.S.I. Act, before the Employees Insurance Court. 3. Now, the grievance of the appellants is that the first respondent is a sick company and if the amount is re- deposited, as directed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, in the said W.P.M.P., it would be difficult for the appellants to recover the said amount in the event of the appellants succeeding in their case before the Employees Insurance Court. 4. We find substance in the said grievance of the appellants. If the amount is re-deposited by the appellants into the bank account of the first respondent herein, and eventually, if the first respondent herein becomes incapable of paying the amount in the event of its losing the case, it is the Corporation which is going to suffer. In other words, it is the public money that is likely to suffer. 5. Therefore, we do not find any justifiability in the impugned order, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is allowed, at the stage of admission, setting aside the impugned order, dated 05.04.2007, passed by the learned Single Judge, in W.P.M.P.No.8867 of 2007 in W.P.No.5004 of 2007. However, there shall be no order as to costs. 7. It is made clear that the recovery of the disputed amount, which is lying with the appellants, would be subject to the result of the proceedings before the Employees Insurance Court. _____________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA ________________________ JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH 17th November 2008 DR ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 2CD copies