IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 27TH JANUARY 2009 / 7TH MAGHA 1930 WA.No. 1909 of 2006 --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.29631/2004 Dated 18/07/2006 .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENT NO.2 ----------------------------- EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL DIRECTOR, PANCHADEEP BHAVAN, NORTH SWARAJ ROUND, THRISSUR-20. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANKARANKUTTY NAIR RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER/IST RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------- 1. USMAN BAIG, S/O.MOHAMMED BAIG, AGED 68 YEARS, MUSLIM, INSURANCE NO.54-301488, RESIDING AT SAVAN HOUSE, N.M.KAMBIVALAPPU, LAJNATHU WARD, ALAPPUZHA. 2. EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COURT, ALAPPUZHA. BY SRI.R.PARAMESWARAN NAIR THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/01/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY,Ag.C.J. & V.GIRI, J -------------------------------- W.A.1909/2006 ----------------------------- Dated this 27th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Koshy (Ag.C.J.) Writ petitioner, who was a workman employed in Kerala Spinners Ltd, Alappuzha, is covered under the Employees State Insurance Act. Since he suffered an accident and sustained injury, he was entitled to disablement benefit from the respondents. The Medical Board assessed his disability at 40% and granted disablement benefit, against which the petitioner filed an appeal before the ESI Court, which resulted in Ext.P1 judgment by which the Insurance Court directed the payment of disablement benefit for 100% disability, but the same will be paid only till the age of superannuation, namely, 58 years and thereafter, he will get only the benefits as awarded by the ESI Medical Board. Paragraph 8 of the judgment reads as follows:- “Now the appellant has crossed 55 years of age and age of superannuation in the W.A.1909/2006 2 company is 58 years. Therefore, it is only appropriate that the appellant shall be given 100% disablement benefit till the age of his superannuation. For the period thereafter, he will be entitled only for benefits as awarded by the ESI Medical Board.” 2. The above judgment was passed on 27.1.1992 by the ESI Board. Considering the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Writ Appeal 940/2003 dated 28.3.2006, the learned single Judge directed that 100% disablement benefits cannot be restricted upto the age of 58, it should be given life long. Corporation is aggrieved by the impugned judgment, by which 100% disablement benefits were directed to be given till the end of life to the writ petitioner. 3. We are of the view that the proper remedy was to file an appeal as provided by the statute. Consequently it was contended that the writ petition was filed after 12 years and on that ground itself, the learned single Judge should not have entertained the writ petition. In the impugned judgment, nothing is stated about the W.A.1909/2006 3 maintainability of the petition. ESI Corporation being a public sector undertaking, provisions are intended for the benefit of the employees as a social security legislation and such a contention cannot be taken by the Corporation without contesting the finding that there is 100% disability. Delay in filing the writ petition also is a substantial matter. In the above circumstances, since the petitioner attained the age of 58 in the year 1995, and there is 100% disability, petitioner will be entitled only to the disablement benefits as decided by the Medical Board till the filing of the writ petition. But from the date of filing the writ petition, ie, from September, 2004 onwards, petitioner will get 100% disablement benefits. Writ appeal is partly allowed. J.B.KOSHY, Acting Chief Justice V.GIRI, Judge mrcs