1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 14.10.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU W.P(MD)No.1688 of 2011 and M.P(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2011 A.Azeema .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The Recovery Officer, Sub Regional Office (Madurai), Employees' State Insurance Corporation, K.K.Nagar, Madurai – 20. 2.The Branch Manager, H.D.F.C. Bank, Main Branch, Sri Nithyakalyani Towers, No.34, Krishnarayaor Tank Street, 2nd Floor, North Veli Street, Madurai – 1. .. Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the order passed by the first respondent in his proceedings No.57/20474/11/ RRC/SRO/MDU/10 dated 02.02.2011 and quash the same as illegal and to pass such further or other orders. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Ajmal Khan For Respondent No.1 : Mr.K.C.Ramalingam O R D E R The petitioner is an employer. In the present writ petition, she has challenged the distraint proceedings initiated by the first respondent, Employees' State Insurance Corporation. 2. In the writ petition, notice of motion was ordered on 14.02.2011. Pending the notice of motion, interim stay was granted on the condition that the petitioner deposits 50% of the demand amount within a period of one week. 3. The learned counsel for the second respondent is not able to confirm that the order has been complied with or not. 4. The contention raised by the petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition was that they have engaged in a textile business and the first respondent has claimed a sum of Rs.42,622/- being omitted by them. It is stated by the petitioner that they have entrusted the case to their counsel Mr.M.Vaithiyalingam and due to non- representation,the cases were dismissed before the Labour Court, Madurai on 25.03.2010. They have also filed applications in I.A.Nos.15, 16 and 17 of 2011 before the Labour Court, Madurai and even before their applications could be taken up for condoning the delay in restoring the main original https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 petitions, the first respondent is executing their order and therefore the writ petition came to be filed and it is unfortunate that the petitioner having availed a statutory remedy under Section 75 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 did not prosecute the same before the Employees' State Insurance Court in E.I.O.P.Nos.11, 12 and 13 of 1998 and allowed to go for default and have also claimed to file their applications for restoration. If that be so, they should move the Labour Court for appropriate relief and not to come to this Court. This forum constituted under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be used as a stop gap for getting interim orders, when their main remedy lies elsewhere. Even assuming that the Labour Court on merits rejected their case under Section 75 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, a regular appeal lies to this Court under Section 82 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948. Hence the present attempt to file such a writ petition is misconceived, bereft of legal reasoning and accordingly the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. Sd-/- Assistant Registrar(Records) / True copy / Sub Assistant Registrar smn To 1.The Recovery Officer, Sub Regional Office (Madurai), Employees' State Insurance Corporation, K.K.Nagar, Madurai – 20. 2.The Branch Manager, H.D.F.C. Bank, Main Branch, Sri Nithyakalyani Towers, No.34, Krishnarayaor Tank Street, 2nd Floor, North Veli Street, Madurai – 1. 1cc to Mr.K.C.Ramalingam, Advocate SR No.35800 sb 03/11/2011 2p 4c W.P(MD)No.1688 of 2011 and M.P(MD)Nos.1 and 2of 2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/