- (1.) As identical questions of law and facts are involved, therefore, I propose to dispose of the instant writ petitions, by virtue of this common order to avoid the repetition. However, the facts, which need a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the sole controversy involved in the writ petitions, have been extracted from (1) CWP No. 50 of 1993 titled as "Bhakra Beas Management Board. Chandigarh and another v. Employees State Insurance Corporation" for ready reference in this regard. The conspectus of the facts, culminating in the commencement, relevant for disposal of the present writ petitions and emanating from the record, is that petitioner Bhakra Beas Management Board, Chandigarh (for brevity "the BBMB") is a statutory body, constituted under section 79 read with section 80 (6) of the Punjab Re-organization Act, 1966 (hereinafter to be referred as "the Reorganization Act") for the administration, maintenance and operation of works enumerated therein, which includes the sub-stations, transmission lines, regulation of supply of water and power from Bhakra Nangal and Beas to the States of Haryana, Punjab and Rajasthan.
(2.) The BBMB claimed that the Employees State Insurance Corporation-respondent (for short "the respondent-Corporation") has been illegally asserting that the employees of Grid Sub-Station are covered under the provisions of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter to be referred as "the ESI Act"). Sequelly, its Regional Director issued the impugned letters dated 30.11.1988 (Annexure P1) and 14.12.1988 (Annexure P2), directing the BBMB to deposit the impugned amount of ' 94,138-80 P, relatable to the period from September, 1986 to June, 1988, failing which, the contribution together with interest will be recovered as arrears of land revenue. According to the BBMB that the Regional Director of respondent-Corporation has requested the Collector, Faridabad, by way of impugned letter dated 27.2.1992 (Annexure P3) for recovering the indicated amount under the provisions of the Punjab Land Revenue Act. Likewise, the respondent-Corporation has threatened to launch prosecution, by means of impugned letter dated 15.10.1992 (Annexure P5).
(3.) Aggrieved by the letters/orders (Annexures P1 to P3 & P5), the petitioner-BBMB preferred the instant writ petitions, challenging the indicated letters/orders, invoking the provisions of Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India.;