The Delhi High Court today asked the Ministry of Labour and Employment whether the appointment of one of the members to the panel of Employee State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) was done in consultation with recognised association of medical practitioners.
Justice Vibhu Bakhru also directed newly appointed ESIC member Dr Purshottam Lal, whose appointment has been challenged in a petition, to file his response by December 4, the next date of hearing.
The court was hearing the petition filed by Indian Medical Association (IMA) challenging the appointment of one of the the two members to ESIC panel on the ground that it has always been represented in ESIC since its formation.
The petition, filed through lawyer Nitesh Jain, had alleged the appointments to the panel were made "in complete ignorance" of Section 4(h) of the Employee State Insurance Act.
"Section 4(h) of ESI Act lays down that two persons representing medical profession have to be appointed as members of ESIC after due consultation with an organisation of such practitioners recognised for this purpose.
"The appointment was made in sheer contravention of the provisions of the ESI Act and abuse of the powers conferred by it as the main provisions have been ignored and not looked into," it had alleged.
On April 20, 2012, the Ministry of Labour and Employment had sent a letter to IMA regarding reconstitution of the ESI Corporation and asked it to nominate persons to represent it.
IMA had on October 20, 2012 clarified that unless the number of seats for representation of IMA on ESIC are increased, IMA would be represented by Dr Vinay Aggarwal, who had been previously nominated.
Later, when it was informed that a nominated member from the Medical Council of India, instead of IMA, was being considered as a member of the ESI Corporation, IMA sent a representation to the Labour Ministry against it.
The representation, however, was ignored, it had said.
