High Court Kerala High Court

The Regional Director vs Mr. H.Sreedharakammath on 12 July, 2007

Kerala High Court
The Regional Director vs Mr. H.Sreedharakammath on 12 July, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

RP No. 493 of 2007()


1. THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. MR. H.SREEDHARAKAMMATH,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SMT.T.D.RAJALAKSHMY, SC, ESI CORPN.

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :12/07/2007

 O R D E R
           J.B.KOSHY & M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JJ.
           -------------------------------------
                  R.P.No.493 OF 2007 in
                 M.F.A.No.594 of 1999 and
                  C.M.Appl.No.777 of 2007
           -------------------------------------
                  Dated 12th July, 2007

                           ORDER

Koshy,J.

C.M.Appl.No.777 of 2007 is a petition to condone

the delay of 112 days in filing the review petition.

Petitioner wanted coverage of respondent’s establishment

from 1.10.1984 to 1.4.1990 on the basis of the amendment of

Section 2(12) with effect from 20.10.1989. Report of the

Local Office Manager stated that 11 persons were working on

2.7.1990. Before that employees’ strength was below 10. It

was also noticed that notice covering factories employing

ten or more persons came into effect from 20.10.89 as the

Act was amended with effect from 20.10.89. The Employees’

Insurance Court held that coverage can only with effect

from 20.10.89. It is the case of the petitioner that there

was a notification covering factories employing ten or more

persons with effect from 1984. That was not produced

before the E.I. Court or before this court even though

proceedings started by issuing show cause notice in 1991.

R.P.No.493/2007 2

Apart from the above, it is unjust for this court to

direct the employer to cover the employees retrospectively

with effect from two decades back as those employees might

have retired and no retirement benefits can be granted.

The Corporation cannot plead that they took one and a half

decades for tracing out the notification covering

establishments. Even if loss is caused to Corporation,

the Corporation is free to realize the amount from it’s

officers who failed to trace notification in time. There

is no ground to review the judgment. No satisfactory

grounds are made out to condone the long delay of 112 days

also. Hence, both delay condonation petition as well as

review petition are dismissed.

J.B.KOSHY
JUDGE

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE

tks