IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 11TH DECEMBER 2009 / 20TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 1128 of 2009(H) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JAI BHARATH ARTS AND SCIENCE COLLEGE REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING TRUSTEE A.M.KAREEM ARAKKAPADY, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.S.AFSAL KHAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 2. UNION OF INDIA,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HEALTH, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT NEW DELHI 110 001. 3. THE EMPLOYES, STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, PANCHDEEP BHAVAN, C.L.G.ROAD, NEW DELHI 110 002. 4. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION, REGION OFFICE (KERALA) PANCHDEEP BHAVAN, ROUND NORTH, THRISSUR 680 020. 5. THE INSPECTOR , INSPECTORATE OFFICE E.S.I.CORPORATION, PERUMBAVOOR DIVISION, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SMT.T.D.RAJALAKSHMY, SC, ESI CORPN. FOR R3,4,5 SHRI.A.K.JOHN, CGC FOR R2 SR. GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.K.S.MUHAMMED HASHIM ADV.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN, ASG. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 1128/09. APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DTD.9.10.07. P2. COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD.18.11.08 BY R5. sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 1128 of 2009 ================== Dated this the 11th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a private educational institution. They are challenging Ext.P1 notification issued by the Government bringing private educational institutions within the purview of the Employees' State Insurance Act. According to the petitioner, private educational institutions are not the establishments which are liable to be covered under the ESI Act. This question has already been decided against the petitioner in the Division Bench decision of this Court in Kerala C.B.S.E. School Managements Association v. State of Kerala [ILR 2009(3) Ker. 309]. Of course, the counsel for the petitioner would submit that an appeal is pending before the Supreme Court against the judgment. However, a Division Bench of this Court has, in Abdul Rehiman v. District Collector, Malappuram [2009 (4) KHC 283] held that even when a Division Bench decision is stayed by the Supreme Court, learned Singe Judges of this Court are bound to follow the ratio of that decision in subsequent cases coming up before them on the same question. Therefore, following those judgments, I dismiss this writ petition. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 2