ASHOK PARIHAR, J. - (1.) Petitioner has challenged the notification dated January 9, 1997 issued by respondent No. 1, the corporation informing the employees working in one of their units namely Hotel Jaipur Ashok, Jaipur that the employees getting salary upto Rs. 6500/- shall be covered under the provisions of Employees State Insurance Act and get benefits therein. The concerned employees were directed to fill up requisite forms at the earliest. This Court, while issuing notices, stayed the operation of the notification dated January 9, 1997 vide order dated April 15, 1997.
(2.) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that the controversy under the exact similar circumstances has already been decided at the main seat in case of All India I. T.D. C. Employees Union v. Employees State Insurance Corporation and Others, 2000-I-LLJ- 591 (Raj). This Court while disposing the writ petition filed by the Association challenging the same notification issued in regard to the employees of Laxmi Vilas Palace Hotel, Jaipur, another unit of the respondent corporation, while not interfering with the impugned notification under writ jurisdiction, gave liberty to the concerned employees to seek remedy under the provisions of Employees- State Insurance Act itself. The Employees State Insurance Corporation was also given liberty to pass necessary orders in regard to waiving the contribution for the period the interim order passed by the Court was in operation. The above judgment of learned single Judge further came to be affirmed by the Division Bench in the case of All India I. T. D. C Employees Union v. Employees State Insurance Corporation and Otfiers 2002-III-LLJ-917 (Raj). It may be mentioned here that against the order of the learned single Judge, the respondent corporation had also filed an special appeal before the Division Bench challenging the directions issued by the learned single Judge to the extent of realization of the contribution during the intervening period when the interim order was in force. The Division Bench while dismissing the special appeal filed by the Association, however, made certain directions which are reproduced here as under: (i) the deduction of the employees' contribution will be made by the employer and along with the employees contribution, employer's contribution shall be deposited with the ESI Corporation' (ii) Such deposits shall be kept in separate account by the ESI Corporation for a period of three months. (iii) If within the said period of three months, any dispute is raised about the applicability of the Act to the establishment in question by the employer or employees 5 before the appropriate forum, the said arrangement of regular deposits of the contribution and maintenance of separate account by the Corporation shall continue until the adjudication of that dispute by the said forum, (iv) However, if no such application is made within three months, the amount of contribution of the employee's and the employer's so deposited with the Corporation shall be appropriated to the normal fund in accordance with the law' (v) If any such dispute is raised and the petitioners succeed, the refund of the amount can appropriately be ordered at the end of such adjudication."
(3.) The Division Bench, however, refused to interfere with the directions of learned single Judge so far as realisation of contribution during the operation of the interim order is concerned.;