Mrs. Maria Margret vs M/S City Hospital Pvt Ltd
2023 Latest Caselaw 9685 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                         PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
                               &
        THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 20TH BHADRA, 1945
                   WA NO. 1428 OF 2023
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.05.2023 IN WP(C) 26817/2013
                 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT/RESPONDENT:

         MRS. USHA STANLY, AGED 70 YEARS,
         VALAVANTHARA HOUSE, KUMBALANGHI P.O., ERNAKULAM,
         KOCHI, PIN - 682007.

         BY ADVS.
         SRI.PAULSON C.VARGHESE
         SMT.C.V.VEENA


RESPONDENT/WRIT PETITIONER:

         M/S CITY HOSPITAL PVT LTD.,
         M.G. ROAD, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN - 682 035,
         REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

         BY ADV. SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON


     THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.09.2023, ALONG WITH WA.1433/2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WA.Nos.1428 & 1433 of 2023
                              - 2 -



          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
                                &
          THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
  MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023/20TH BHADRA, 1945
                        WA NO.1433 OF 2023
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.05.2023 IN WP(C) 26790/2013 OF
                    HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT/RESPONDENT:

          MRS. MARIA MARGRET, AGED 68 YEARS,
          POOTHARA HOUSE, THEKKEVALAM, EDAYAKUNNAM,
          ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682027.

          BY ADVS.
          SRI.PAULSON C.VARGHESE
          SMT.C.V.VEENA


RESPONDENT/WRIT PETITIONER:

          M/S. CITY HOSPITAL PVT LTD., M.G. ROAD,
          ERNAKULAM, COCHIN - 682 0235,

          REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
          DR.ZIA MYDIN, S/O.M.MYDEEN KUNJU,
          RESIDING AT 41/960,
          PULLEPADY ROAD, KOCHI-682018.         *DELETED

          * THE DESCRIPTION OF RESPONDENT IS DELETED AS PER
          ORDER DATED 18.8.2023 IN WA NO.1433/2023.

          BY ADV. SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON

     THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.09.2023, ALONG WITH WA.1428/2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WA.Nos.1428 & 1433 of 2023
                               - 3 -




                             JUDGMENT

Dated, this the 11th September, 2023

Anu Sivaraman, J.

These Writ Appeals are preferred against the

judgment of the learned Single Judge interfering

with the common order dated 29.07.2013 and directing

the consideration of the claim petitions afresh.

2. The learned counsel for the appellants submits

that the appellants were employed as Clerical staff

in the respondent hospital and had retired in the

year 2011 on attaining the age of superannuation. It

is submitted that they had approached the Labour

Court seeking the payment of the minimum wages as

found eligible to them, under the relevant

notifications issued by the Government.

3. The Claim Petitions were disposed of by the

common order finding that the hospital in question

is a super speciality hospital and that the WA.Nos.1428 & 1433 of 2023

- 4 -

petitioners were entitled to minimum wages as per

the calculation statement submitted by them. An

amount of Rs.1,61,575/- was found as arrears of

wages, leave wages and bonus to the petitioner in

C.P.26/2011 for the period from 2006 to 2011 and an

amount of Rs.1,56,844/- was found to be the amount

due to the petitioner in C.P.27/2011. The amounts

were directed to be paid within three months from

the date of order with 9% interest per annum from

the date of order till the date of realisation if

not paid within 3 months of the date of the order.

4. The common order was challenged by the

respondent before this Court, on the specific ground

that the hospital in question was not having any of

the requirements of a super speciality hospital

during the relevant time i.e., the period from 2006

to 2011 and that the notifications relied on by the

employees were not applicable and could not be

relied upon to grant the benefits. WA.Nos.1428 & 1433 of 2023

- 5 -

5. After considering the contentions advanced,

this Court found that Ext.P3, which was a document

relied on by the Labour Court to find that the

hospital in question was a super speciality

hosptial, was a brochure issued in 2012 or

thereafter and that it could not be relied to

contend that the hospital in question was a super

speciality hospital during the period, for which the

claim petitions related to. In the above view of the

matter, the common order was set aside and the

matter was remitted to the Labour Court to decide

afresh after leading additional evidence. Time limit

of six months was also provided for the Labour Court

to decide the issue.

6. Having considered the contentions advanced on

either side, we are of the opinion that the question

whether the hospital in question was a super

speciality hospital or a tertiary care center and

whether the notifications relied on were applicable WA.Nos.1428 & 1433 of 2023

- 6 -

at the relevant time, are questions to be decided by

the Labour Court. Suffice it to say that the remand

made by the learned Single Judge will be an open

remand and all questions can be considered by the

Labour Court itself. Time frame fixed by the learned

Single Judge shall be scrupulously adhered to by

Labour Court.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN, JUDGE

Sd/-

C.JAYACHANDRAN, JUDGE

ww WA.Nos.1428 & 1433 of 2023

- 7 -

APPENDIX OF WA 1428/2023

PETITIONER ANNEXURES:

ANNEXURE 1 : COPY OF WEBSITE PAGE OF THE RESPONDENT HOSPITAL.

WA.Nos.1428 & 1433 of 2023

- 8 -

APPENDIX OF WA 1433/2023

PETITIONER ANNEXURES:

ANNEXURE 1 COPY OF WEBSITE PAGE OF THE RESPONDENT HOSPITAL