IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2009 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1931 W.A. No. 1362 of 2006(B) ---------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.31384/2004 DATED 30.6.2005 .................... APPELLANT/1ST RESPONDENT : -------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, INDUSTRIES (I) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BENNY GERVASIS RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONERS & 2ND RESPONDENT: --------------- 1. K. BHASKARAN, S/O. KRISHNAN, MOOLAPPUZHA THARAYIL, PONMANA P.O., PANMANA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. P. BAHULEYAN, S/O.PARAMESWARAN, CHARUVIL HOUSE, PONMANA P.O., PANMANA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA MINERALS AND METALS LTD., CHAVARA P.O., SANKARAMANGALAM. ADV. SRI.K.N.GOVINDANKUTTY MENON SRI.S.MADHAVAN NAIR FOR R1 & R2 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.A. NO. 1362 OF 2006 ----------------------------------------- Dated 8th April, 2009. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The 1st respondent in the Writ Petition is the appellant. Respondents 1 and 2 were the petitioners. 2. Respondents 1 and 2 are retired employees of the Kerala Minerals and Metals Limited, Chavara. They represented before the said Company and the Government, praying to introduce a health scheme for retired employees of the Company. They say, the occupational hazards faced by the employees of the Company are unique and therefore, there should be a special health scheme to help the retired employees, who are suffering from various ailments. Though the Company was ready and willing to implement such a scheme for its retired employees, the Government were not willing to give sanction for the same. In the above background, they filed the Writ Petition, seeking the following relief: “issue directions to the 1st respondent Government to WA 1362/2006 2 issue necessary orders to the 2nd respondent Co., to implement the medial benefit scheme as approved by the Board of Directors at any rate within a period of one month.” The learned Single Judge, after hearing both sides, issued the following direction: “Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to introduce the Medical Benefit Scheme to the retired employees of the Mineral Wing of the Kerala Minerals and Metals Limited, Chavara, Kollam and bring the same into force, without further delay and at any rate, within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.” Aggrieved by the above direction, this Writ Appeal is filed. 3. The appellant/State submits that the special scheme mentioned in the judgment is to cater to the medical needs of retired employees of the Mineral Wing of the 3rd respondent Company. The workers of that Wing are mainly engaged in mineral extraction. There are four other Government Companies also in the State, engaged in such mining and mineral extraction activities. They are, Kerala Ceramics Limited, Kundara, Kerala Clays and Ceramic Products, Kannur, Malabar Cements, Walayar and Travancore Cements, Nattakom, Kottayam. According to the Government, there are no materials to show that the retired employees of the Mineral Wing of the 3rd respondent Company are suffering from any special disabilities or ailments. So, there is no necessity for introduction of a special scheme for such WA 1362/2006 3 employees. If sanction for that scheme is granted, similar demands will come from the retired employees of the aforementioned companies also. Such schemes will be a financial burden and will affect the viability of the industrial units. In fact, there are no grounds also for introducing such a health scheme. At any rate,the learned Single Judge should have issued only a direction to the Government to consider the approval of the scheme. In the absence of any statutory right in the writ petitioners and a corresponding duty in the Government, this Court should not have issued such a positive direction, it is submitted. 4. We find considerable force in the submission of the appellant. Whether a special health scheme should be introduced for the writ petitioners and other similarly placed retired employees of the 3rd respondent Company is a policy matter, which should be decided by the Government and not by the courts. We notice that there is no legislation covering the field. Therefore, the State does not owe any duty to the writ petitioners and they do not have any corresponding legal right also. Therefore, the issuance of a peremptory direction, as was done in the judgment under appeal, was not called for. Ours is a Government of the people and not of the courts. So, we are of the view that the direction issued by the learned Single Judge requires modification. It is ordered that the WA 1362/2006 4 Government may consider the approval of the scheme proposed by the 3rd respondent Company for the benefit of its retired employees. This, the Government may do within four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Appeal is allowed as above. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE. nm/