Dr Md MOZAFFAR UDDIN vs EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION (ESIC) on 8 October 2026

1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LABOUR EMPLOYMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, SHRAM SHAKTI BHAWAN, KIDWAI MARG, DELHI-100001.

2. THE EMPLOYEES' STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION THROUGH THE CHAIRMAN, EMPLOYEES' STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION, MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, PANCHDEEP BHAWAN, CIG MARG, NEW DELHI-110002.

3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL (E-I), EMPLOYEES' STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION HEAD QUARTER'S OFFICE, MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, PANCHDEEP BHAWAN, KOTLA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110002.

4. THE MEDICAL COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES' STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION, MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, PANCHDEEP BHAWAN, CIG MARG, NEW DELHI-110002.

5. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR (FINANCE), OFFICE OF THE DIRECTORATE (MEDICAL), EMPLOYEES' STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION DISPENSARY-CUM- DIAGNOSTIC CENTRE COMPLEX, MAYUR VIHAR, PHASE-1, MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI-110091. Digitally signed by DURGESH UTTAM DURGE SH UTTAM

6. THE DRAWING & DISBURSING OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTORATE (MEDICAL), EMPLOYEES' STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION DISPENSARY-CUM- DIAGNOSTIC CENTRE COMPLEX, MAYUR VIHAR, PHASE-1, MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI-110091

7. THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, EMPLOYEES' STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION, PANCHDEEP BHAWAN, JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU MARG, NEAR INCOME TAX, PATNA-800001 (BIHAR) ……Opposite Parties For Applicant:- Shri M.P. Dixit, Advocate For Opposite Parties:- None

O R D E R (Oral) Per:- JUSTICE NARENDRA KUMAR JOHARI, MEMBER [J]

1. Counsel for applicant is present.

2. At the very outset, counsel for applicant has submitted that opposite parties have issued the recovery order which is against the law and rule and against order dt. 28.08.2025 passed by the Principal Bench of CAT, New Delhi in O.A. No. 3438/2022, which is well within the knowledge of opposite parties. Moreover, he has submitted his representation dt. 30.09.2026 to opposite party/ competent authority which has not been decided yet.

3. After arguing his case upto some length the counsel for applicant mentioned that the purpose of the O.A shall be satisfied at this stage, if the opposite party/ competent authority be directed to consider and decide the above representation by way of speaking and reasoned order in accordance with law/ rule, within a stipulated time. He further submitted that applicant is hopeful that if his representation is decided accordingly, his grievances may be redressed.

4. He further submitted that since the recovery order which has been passed by the opposite parties vide order dt. 07.09.2026 which is Digitally signed by DURGESH UTTAM DURGE SH UTTAM

against the order of the Tribunal. Hence, the operation of recovery order which is Annexure-A/1 of the O.A. be stayed.

5. Counsel for applicant has submitted that he has provided the copy of O.A. to the opposite parties but none is present on behalf of the opposite parties.

6. We have heard the contention of counsel for applicant and perused the record.

7. In view of above submission, we direct to opposite parties / competent authority to decide the representation which has been filed by the applicant on 30.09.2026 by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law/ rule within 30 days from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Till the disposal of the above representation, the recovery order dt. 07.09.2026 which is passed against the applicant be kept in abeyance.

8. It is made clear that we have not entered into merit of the case. Accordingly the O.A. is decided.

9. No order as to costs.

10. Registry is directed to transfer the record of this O.A. to Patna.

(Kumar Rajesh Chandra) (Justice Narendra Kumar Johari)

Member (A) Member (J) du/-

Digitally signed by DURGESH UTTAM DURGE SH UTTAM