Court : Kerala
Decided on : Dec-23-2015
P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J. Dismissal of the Insurance cases filed by the appellants/educational institutions before the Employees Insurance Court under Section 75 r/w Sec. 77 of the Employees Insurance Act (for short Act ) for a declaration that their Institutions are not liable to be covered under the Act; that no contribution is liable to be paid by them under any circumstance; that Teachers are not liable to be considered as employees as defined under Section 2(9) of the Act and thus seeking to set aside the notice/proceedings issued by the authorities of the ESI Corporation, is the subject matter of challenge in all these cases preferred under Section 82 of the Act. In some of the cases, violation of Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India, for intruding into the minority status/rights is also projected as a ground for interference. 2. One of the main contentions raised in these appeals is as to the incompetency on the part of the authorities concerned to proceed with further st...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Dec-23-2015
Shaffique, J. 1. All these writ petitions have been referred to this Court by a common reference order dated 6/8/2015 wherein the learned Single Judge having considered the matter in detail and answering certain issues, expressed doubt regarding the power of Central Board of Secondary Education (for short 'CBSE') to reduce the limitation period for correcting the date of birth in the mark sheet by one year, by observing that the period of five years have been specified based on a concession made before a Division Bench of this Court. 2. All these writ petitions were filed by separate writ petitioners claiming that the CBSE and the respective Principals/Headmasters of the school should be directed to correct the date of birth in the mark sheet and the registers maintained by the said authorities, as the date of birth appearing in the Register maintained by the local authority is different. 3. The short facts in WP(C) No.1362/2015 are: The petitioner was born at Abudhabi, United Arab Emi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Dec-23-2015
Anil K. Narendran, J. 1. These appeals arise out of a common judgment dated 2.3.2001 of the learned Company Judge of this Court in C.C.Nos.25/1994, 15/1994, 23/1994, 27/1994, 26/1994,22/1994, 24/1994 and 2/1994 respectively in C.P.No.57/1989. Since the issues raised are common we propose to dispose of these appeals by a common judgment. 2. The appellants in these appeals are the respondents in C.C.Nos.25/1994, 15/1994, 23/1994, 27/1994, 26/1994, 22/1994, 24/1994 and 2/1994 filed in C.P.No.57/1989. By order dated 4.4.1990 in C.P.No.57/1989 of the learned Company Judge M/s.Chandini Chits Private Ltd., a Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was ordered to be wound up and the Official Liquidator attached to this Court was appointed as the Liquidator of the Company. The winding up proceedings in C.P.No.57/1989 commenced on 16.10.1989, the date on which the said Company Petition was filed before this Court. The order of winding up was passed...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Dec-23-2015
1. The petitioner who contested the election from Ward No.35 of the newly constituted Feroke Municipality questions the notification issued by the Kerala State Election Commission for a re-poll. The Electronic Voting Machine (J.34139) installed in one of the booths developed a technical snag in the midst of poll on 2.11.2015 and refused to record votes. A Control Unit error was shown in the Electronic Voting Machine and about 135 voters had by then exercised their right in the polling booth in question. The Returning Officer summoned the technician deputed by the manufacturer of the Electronic Voting Machine who after inspection opined that the same is not fit for further use. Another Electronic Voting Machine (G.58307) was supplied and the polling resumed after 45 minutes as evident by Annexures R1(A) letter, R1(B) receipt and R1 (C) report of the Returning Officer. 2. It was found during the counting of votes on 7.11.2015 that the votes recorded by the Electronic Voting Machine (J.34...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Dec-22-2015
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J. 1. This appeal is by the claimant challenging the quantum of compensation awarded to him by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. 2. The claimant, a practising advocate, who deposed that he was then earning around Rs.6,000/- per month, was injured as a result of a motor accident when a tempo trax driven by the first respondent knocked down the motorcycle on which the claimant was riding through a public road on 8.9.2001. The claimant testified as P.W.1 and tendered documentary evidence as Exts.A1 to A22. Ext.X1 certificate of disability issued by the Medical Board, Medical College Hospital, evidenced that the claimant's permanent disability is 27%. No contra evidence was tendered by either among the respondents. The Tribunal held that the first respondent was negligent. It did not find any contributory negligence on the claimant. The claimant was awarded a total amount of Rs.3,70,416/- as compensation with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the pet...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Dec-21-2015
P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J. Would the non-renewal of licence issued to a contractor under the relevant provisions of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act,1970 [ CLRA Act in short], that too for a short period, grant any automatic/vested right to the workers engaged by the contractor to raise a claim for being treated as employees of the principal employer? Will it amount to a dispute as envisaged under section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, if any such claim is raised by the workers/Unions and is it obligatory for the Conciliation Officer to have the issue conciliated and on failure, to send a referral report to the Government for causing adjudication? These are the legal issues involved in this appeal. 2. The challenge is mainly against the verdict passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the claim of the Union/writ petitioner has been accepted, setting aside the impugned order and directing the conciliation authority to have the matter conciliated, despite the f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Dec-17-2015
1. Education is serious business; both in terms of the results it seeks to achieve, for the recipients and the returns it offers, to the organizers. Intriguing too, for the looser is the one, who actually imparts it; the Teacher. The State is the most important stake-holder who takes upon itself the financial liability, especially so with respect to elementary education, in the context of Article 21A introduced by the 86th amendment to the Constitution of India. The State has willingly taken up such financial liability considering the balancing and compensatory aspect of nation-building, which good education purports to undertake. However, there is a general tendency to ignore the person who is pivotal in administering education, the teachers, who are often sidelined and whose grievances remain unattended. World over, it is a phenomenon that the teachers, who occupy the highest position in human society are not remunerated, commensurate with such social status. The travails of teachers...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Dec-16-2015
Ramachandra Menon, J. Common grievance involved in these writ petitions, stated as filed in public interest, is in respect of the alleged illegal reclamation of paddy land/wet land, mostly lying water logged, for commercial activity in connection with setting up of a resort involving Crores of rupees, causing much environmental hazards and damage to the eco-system, adversely affecting the free flow of water, blocking water channels joining the backwater (Vembanadu Kayal) bordering the northern boundary of the property in question; that too, in violation of the Coastal Zone Regulations. 2. It is contended that illegal reclamation and construction activities are being pursued, based on the orders/clearance obtained without revealing the actual facts and figures and also without obtaining any sanction from the Ministry of the Environmental and Forest, Government of India in terms of the Coastal Zone Regulation Notification 1999. It is asserted from the part of the petitioners that the rec...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Dec-09-2015
1. This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 07-09-2004 rendered in Appeal Suit, A.S.No.225/2000 by the District Court, Palakkad, which has affirmed the impugned judgment and decree dated 28-02-2000 in Original Suit, O.S.No. 410/1994 of the Munsiff's Court, Palakkad. The suit was for injunction, which was dismissed by the trial court on 28-02-2000, which in turn has been affirmed by the impugned verdict of the lower appellate court. So it is against the concurrent findings by both the courts below that the plaintiff has instituted the aforecaptioned Regular Second Appeal. 2. The case set up by the plaintiff is as follows:- That he is conducting the business of steel furniture and other fabrication works in the name and style, Ramco Engineering Works , which has been registered as a Small Scale Industrial Unit (SSI Unit). The plaint schedule property, having an extend of 37 cents of land, is part of the property acquired by the Government for industrialisati...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Dec-08-2015
1. These writ petitions challenge the constitutional validity of the Kerala Tax on Luxuries Act, to the extent it seeks to levy luxury tax on Direct to Home Services (hereinafter referred to as DTH Services ). The petitioners in these writ petitions are all Companies engaged in providing DTH Services, having been granted licenses, by the Government of India, to provide such services under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 and the Indian Wireless Act, 1933 on the terms and conditions specified in the licenses issued to them. 2. In the broadcasting sector, the content of the broadcast reaches the ultimate subscriber through different distribution platforms. For the purposes of the instant cases, the examination is limited to only two of them viz. Cable TV network and DTH services. In the cable TV network, the services value chain comprises of four supply side entities namely (i) the broadcaster, (ii) the aggregator, (iii) The Multi-system operator (MSO) and (iv) The local cable operator (LC...
Tag this Judgment!