BHAGWATI PRASAD, J. - (1.) In this writ petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by the notification Annexure P/7 passed by the Manager (Personnel), Laxmi Vilas Palace Hotel, Udaipur, whereby the employees were informed that from their salaries the amount payable to E.S.I, contribution would be deducted. The petitioner impugns this notification on the ground that the E.S.I. Act is not applicable to them in view of the proviso to Section 1(4) of the E.S.I. Act because the respondent Hotel is an agency of the Government and the Government owns a major part of it.
(2.) The respondent E.S.I. Corporation has put in appearance and contested the writ petition. The stand of the E.S.I. Corporation is that Laxmi Vilas Palace Hotel is not Government. In the alternative even if it is Government then, whether the petitioners are liable to pay their share towards E.S.I, contribution or not this dispute can be raised before the Labour Tribunal in terms of Basant Kumar Sarkar & Others v. The Eagle Rolling Mills Ltd. & Others (1964-II-LLJ- 105) (SC), wherein it has been observed as" under: "Held, that although the powers conferred on the High Court under Art. 226 are very wide they could not take in within their, sweep industrial dispute of the kind which the contention of the workmen sought to raise. The proper remedy which was available to the workmen to ventilate their grievances in respect of the said notices and circulars was to take recourse to: Sec. 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, or seek relief, if possible under Sections 74 and 75 of the Act."
(3.) Since the petitioners have an efficacious alternative remedy the writ petition cannot be entertained. The other ground raised by the learned counsel for the respondent Corporation is that even when the proviso to Section 1(4) of the E.S.I. Act is sought to be enforced, the petitioners can apply for examination that is another aspect which is available under the E.S.I. Act. Therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable.;