IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2011 / 30TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 6719 of 2007(Y) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- THE MANAGER, MOOPLY ESTATE, PALAPPILLY P.O., TRICHUR. BY SRI.A.M.SHAFFIQUE, SENIOR ADVOCATE BY ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.ANIL D. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, PALAPPILLY RUBBER ESTATE LABOUR CONGRESS, INTUC, PALAPPILLY P.O., TRICHUR DISTRICT. 2. INSPECTOR OF PLANTATIONS, ALUVA. 3. CHIEF INSPECTOR OF PLANTATIONS, KOTTAYAM. 4. LABOUR COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN R2 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.6719/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT NO.B86/02 DATED 8/5/02. P2 COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 1/7/02. P3 COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 23/5/03. P4 COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED NIL APRIL, 2004. P5 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 30/7/06. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.6719 OF 2007 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the Manager of an Estate to which the Plantation Labour Act is applicable. One of their employees raised a claim for reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by that employee in a hospital of his choice for the treatment of his wife. The Union representing the employee approached the authorities under the Plantation Labour Act for a direction to the petitioner to reimburse the medical expenses so incurred by the employee. Orders have been passed directing the petitioner to reimburse the expenses incurred by the employee. That is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. Although several questions are raised, the only question pressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner is the question as to whether, when the employer maintains a hospital inside the Estate for giving free treatment to the employees of the Estate, the authorities under the Plantation Labour Act can direct the employer to reimburse the medical expenses incurred W.P.(C)No.6719/17 2 by an employee in hospitals of his or her choice. 3. It is now submitted before me that, that the very question is pending consideration in several cases before various authorities including this Court. In this case, the amount involved is meagre and in fact this Court has by interim order dated 2.3.2007 directed release of the amount to the employee. 4. In the above circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petition may be disposed of leaving open the question of liability of the petitioner in respect of medical reimbursement for treatment in any hospital of the choice of the employee to be agitated by the petitioner in a more appropriate case. Having heard both sides, I dispose of this writ petition without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to raise the very same contention in a more appropriate case where the amount is sufficient to agitate the issue seriously. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.6719/17 3 W.P.(C)No.6719/17 4