IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4864 of 2004 MOHAN SHARAN, SON OF LATE DR. RAGHUNATH SHARAN, PROPRIETOR M/S CHETAK SERVICE CENTRE, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA – PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, PANCHADEEP BHAWAN, J.L. NEHRU MARG, PATNA. 2. THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION REGIONAL OFFICE, PANCHADEEP BHAWAN, J.L. NEHRU MARG, PATNA. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, PANCHADEEP BHAWAN, J.L. NEHRU MARG, PATNA. --- RESPONDENTS. ********** For the petitioner: Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Adv. For Respondent (E.S.I.C.) : Dr. Anshuman, Adv. ********* 5/ 29-03-2011 Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, being aggrieved by an order dated 17.03.2004 (Annexure- 4), passed by the respondent Deputy Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Patna, whereby the petitioner has been directed to deposit Rs. 12,315/- towards his contribution under the provisions of Section 45A of The Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 ( in short “the Act”). 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has fairly submitted that since there was no interim protection granted by an order of this Court, therefore, in all fairness, the petitioner has already carried out the aforesaid order dated 17.03.2004 and has deposited Rs. 15,256/- by 2 cheque dated 12.09.2005, which includes the interest also. 4. Now only grievance of the petitioner is that the contribution under the provisions of the Act should not be realized from the principal employer as also by the immediate employer. He apprehends that the aforesaid amount might have been realized from the immediate employer also, besides principal employer. If that be so, it will be open to the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority to get the record verified and if the payment has already been made towards contribution, then that amount should be either refunded to the petitioner or be adjusted towards future contribution under the Act. 5. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. BTiwary/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)