IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 3RD OCTOBER 2008 / 11TH ASWINA 1930 Ins.APP.No. 26 of 2006() ------------------------ IC.57/2004 of EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COURT, ALAPPUZHA .................... APPELLANT/OPPOSITE PARTY ---------------------------------- THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, E.S.I. CORPORATION, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANKARANKUTTY NAIR RESPONDENT/APPLICANT ------------------------ K.P.SUDARSANAN, S/O.PAPPU,NISHALAYAM, S.L.PURAM P.O., KANJIKUZHY. ADV. SRI.A.JAYASANKAR SRI.MANU GOVIND THIS INSURANCE APPEALS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- Ins. Appeal No. 26 OF 2006 --------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred by the ESI Corporation against the decision of the EI Court, Alappuzha, in I.C. No.57/04. The applicant before the said court had been working as a general worker in the coir factory for 29 years. His main job was to take out the coir mats and mattings from one place to another for drying. It is submitted that these products are subject to various types of dyes and chemicals during manufacturing process and on account of permanently coming into contact with those objects, he had developed dermatitis and has claimed the benefits for the same. 2. On the contra, the ESI Corporation would contend that it is not an occupational disease and hence the applicant is not entitled for the benefit. But it has to be remembered that relaxation of the Rule has been done and he had been given 309 days extended sick benefit. Under Section 52A, Schedule III Part B Sl. No.13 of the ESI Act, the skin diseases caused by physical, chemical or biological agents not included in other items would form an occupational disease. So the necessary ingredient to constitute that the skin Ins. Appeal No.26/06 2 disease has been resulted on account of the physical or chemical or biological agents used in the industry with which the applicant has come into contact. The other serial numbers deal with the specific contact with certain other chemicals. One cannot possibly rule out that dermatitis cannot be caused on account of coming into contact with this chemicals. But it is a matter which requires consideration namely medical as well as scientific evidence. First of all one has to understand what are the chemicals used in the process before taking it out for drying. If those chemicals which are used are the substances which is not covered under any other serial number, Sl. No.13 will come into play. Further it has to be proved that it is on account of contact with such substances the applicant has developed dermatitis. These are all matters which can be easily proved by getting scientific as well as medical evidence. The conclusion of the EI Court that the admission on the part of the ESI Corporation is incorrect for the reason that exemption can be granted only when a particular fact is not admitted and not otherwise. 3. Therefore, I set aside the order passed by the EI Court and direct the said court to refer the person to an expert Medical Ins. Appeal No.26/06 3 Board to find out the cause of the dermatitis and whether the substance used can cause the said disease. Before referring to the same, it has also to be made clear as that what all substances are used in the manufacturing process so that it will be of help to the Medical Board to find out whether such components can cause the disease. Therefore, the order under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the court below for the said purpose. Needless to say that both parties shall be given equal opportunities to adduce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their contentions. It is further directed that the EI Court shall give notice to both parties fixing the date of appearance. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps Ins. Appeal No.26/06 4