PRANAB KUMAR CHATTOPADHYAY, J. - (1.) The petitioners herein filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act in the Employees Insurance Court, West Bengal, for condoning the delay in filing the case before the said Court. The learned Judge of the said Employees Insurance Court rejected the said application filed on behalf of the petitioners on the ground that the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is not applicable to any proceeding before the Employees Insurance Court. The petitioners have challenged the aforesaid decision of the learned Judge of the Employees Insurance Court in the present writ petition.
(2.) The facts of this case are briefly mentioned hereinafter: The petitioner No. 1 is engaged in tailoring business. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioner No. 1 is not engaged in any business invoking any manufacturing process with or without the aid of power. It has also been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the total number of persons employed in the establishment of the petitioner No. 1 are below the statutory minimum number as provided under the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as ESI Act.)
(3.) It has been contended on behalf of the petitioners that several inspections of the petitioners establishment had been carried out by the insurance inspectors of the Employees State Insurance Corporation on different dates in the year 1991. According to the petitioners, it was never found in course of the said inspections that the establishment of the petitioner No. 1 ever employed 10 or more persons and as such the establishment of the petitioner No. 1 cannot come within the purview of the said ESI Act, 1948.;