REGIONAL DIRECTOR, EMPLOYEES' STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION vs M/S. BOMBAY GYMKHANA LTD., THR. ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY

Judgment text excerpt

2026:BHC-AS:9817 Sayyed 901-FA(ST).6383.2019.modified.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.6383 OF 2019 Regional Director, Employees' State Insurance Corporation, Panchdeep Bhawan, N. M. Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013 ...Appellant (Org. Respondent) Versus M/s. Bombay Gymkhana Ltd., Mahatma Gandhi Road, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 Through its Authorized Signatory ...Respondent (Org. Applicant) _____________________________________________________ Mr. Shailesh S. Pathak for the Appellant. Mr. Manoj Gujar a/w Mr. T. R. Yadav i/by C. R. Naidu & Co. for the Respondent. _____________________________________________________ CORAM : JITENDRA JAIN, J. DATE : 24 FEBRUARY 2026 JUDGMENT : 1. On being disclosed about me being a service member of the respondent-gymkhana, both learned counsel stated that they do not have any objection to this Court hearing the present appeal. 2. Admit on following substantial question of law :- “Whether, the Employees’ State Insurance Court (ESI Court) was justified in setting aside the order passed under Section 85-B of the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 (ESI Act) on the ground that the same is passed beyond the time limit provided by proviso to explanation (b) to Section 77(1A)? 1 of 13 Sayyed 901-FA(ST).6383.2019.modified.doc 3. Since the issue revolves around a narrow compass, by consent of the parties, the appeal is heard finally at the admission stage. Brief Facts:- 4. The respondent is a gymkhana incorporated and registered under the Companies Act with the object to promote, manage, assist in the promotion of all forms of athletic sports, pass time, recreation, etc. Proceedings with respect to applicability of the ESI Act:- 5. There was some difference of opinion between the