IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 9TH JULY 2010 / 18TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 20819 of 2010(B) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ MUNDAKAYAM MEDICAL TRUST HOSPITAL MUNDAKAYAM,IDUKKI DISTRICT PIN 686 513, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR FR.MATHEW PUTHUMANA. BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H. SRI.SHINE VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT LABOUR DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 2. ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER PEERMADE, PIND 685 531 IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.K.S.MOHAMMED HASHIM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No.20819 of 2010-B ---------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of July, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers: “i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, declaring that the Kerala Shops & Commercial Establishments Act 1960 is not applicable to Private Hospitals. ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ restraining the 2nd respondent from initiating any action against the petitioner under the Provisions of the Kerala Shops and Commercial Establishments Act. iii) To pass such other orders or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice. 2. It appears that, the petitioner is more aggrieved of Ext.P2 dated 14.6.2010 issued by the second respondent. The intervention is sought to be made with reference to Exts.P3 and P4 interim orders passed by this Court; to have similar orders to be passed in the present case as well. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4. The grievance projected in the Writ Petition is mainly with regard to the dispute to have the petitioner's establishment to be covered under the Kerala Shops and Commercial Establishment Act W.P(C) No.20819 of 2010-B 2 1960 and the consequential liability if any, with regard to the contribution to be effected to the welfare fund in respect of the workers. Exts.P3 and P4 interim orders passed by this Court are also in respect of cases, involving similar factual circumstances. But, Ext.P2 notice has been issued by the second respondent in his capacity as the concerned authority under the “Kerala Minimum Wages Act” and the relevant rules. The notice has been issued stating that, in spite of the fact that the petitioner establishment is a notified establishment coming within the Schedule of the Kerala Minimum Wages Act, it has been noted that the petitioner is effecting only lesser wages to the employees concerned. 5. The pleadings and prayers moulded in the Writ Petition do not reconcile with the contents of Ext.P2 notice. Hence interference is declined and the Writ Petition is dismissed. However, this judgment will not stand in the way of the petitioner in challenging the correctness and sustainability of Ext.P2 by raising appropriate pleadings and prayers. The Writ Petition is dismissed. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE ab