Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Rajan A.M. Aged 38 Years vs The District Collector

Author: P.B.Suresh Kumar

Bench: P.B.Suresh Kumar

       

  

   

 
 
         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                        PRESENT:

      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2014/16TH ASWINA, 1936

               WP(C).No. 3950 of 2013 (P)
               ---------------------------

PETITIONERS:
-----------

          1. RAJAN A.M. AGED 38 YEARS
          S/O.A.M.KOTTAN, MAYYAL, PODAVOOR P.O.
         VIA CHEEMENI, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

          2. SHAJU P., S/O.KALYANI, MAYYAL, PODAVOOR
         P.O., VIA CHEEMENI, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

          3. SHAJI P., S/O.KALYANI, MAYYAL, PODAVOOR
         P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT.


          4. BIJU M., S/O.THAMBAN, MAYYAL, PODAVOOR
         P.O., VIA CHEEMENI, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

          5. K.M.SOMASUNDARAN, S/O.KORAN, MAYYAL,
         PODAVOOR P.O., VIA
         CHEEMENI, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

          6. K.RAJESH, S/O.NARAYANAN, MAYYAL, PODAVOOR
         P.O., VIA CHEEMENI,KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

          7. SATHEESH A.M., S/O.KUMARAN A.M., MAYYAL,
         PODAVOOR P.O., VIA CHEEMENI, KASARAGOD
         DISTRICT.

          8. VIJESH A.M., MAYYAL, PODAVOOR P.O., VIA
         CHEEMENI, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

      BY ADVS.SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS
              SMT.P.K.PRIYA
              SRI.K.V.SREE VINAYAKAN
              SRI.K.M.MUHAMMED HUSSAIN

WP(C).No. 3950 of 2013

RESPONDENTS:
------------

          1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KASARAGOD - 673101


          2. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
         KASARAGOD - 673101.


          3. THE PRESIDENT, KAYYUR-CHEEMENI GRAMA
         PANCHAYATH
         POST CHEEMENI, KASARAGOD DISTRICT PIN - 673106

          4. THE SECRETARY, KAYYOOR-CHEEMENI GRAMA
         PANCHAYATH
         POST CHEEMENI, KASARGOD DISTRICT PIN - 673106

          5. KAYYOOR - CHEEMENI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, POST
         CHEEMENI
         KASARAGOD DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
         PIN - 673106

      R4 BY ADV. SRI.SURESH KUMAR KODOTH
      SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER M. MUHAMMED SHAFI

      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY
HEARD ON 08-10-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 3950 of 2013

                   APPENDIX


PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

P1  : TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF WORKERS OF "PODAVOOR
KADAVU" PUBLISHED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

P2  : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT NO.
GS-58562/12 DATED 00-11-2012


RESPONDENT' EXHIBITS: NIL


                        //TRUE COPY//

                                       P.A. TO JUDGE



                     P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J.
              -----------------------------------------------
                    W.P.(C).No.3950 of 2013
              -----------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 8th day of October, 2014


                          J U D G M E N T

Petitioners are labourers engaged in sand mining at Podavoor Kadavu, within the limits of Kayyur-Cheemeni Grama Panchayat, the fifth respondent. The sand mining activities within the said Panchayat are regulated by the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001, hereinafter referred to as "the Act". Rule 17 (j) of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Rules, 2002, hereinafter referred to as "the Rules", confer authority on the Panchayat to publish the list of sand mining labourers working in the Kadavu within the Panchayat.

2. Petitioners are persons enlisted by the fifth respondent Grama Panchayat as sand mining labourers for Podavoor Kadavu. According to them, there was a dispute among the enlisted workers and when the dispute was W.P.(C).No.3950 of 2013 2 brought to the notice of the District Collector in his capacity as the Chairman of the District Expert Committee, he instructed the Panchayat to disengage the petitioners and they are denied employment based on the directions issued by the District Collector.

3. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions submitted that the dispute among the enlisted workers arose for want of sufficient work at the Kadavu and in the circumstances, the District Collector, directed the Panchayat to exclude the workers enlisted during the year 2012. The learned counsel for the fifth respondent Panchayat pointed out that the Panchayat has only given effect to the directions issued by the District Collector.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are not persons enrolled during the year 2012 and in the guise of implementing the directions issued by the District Collector, the panchayat has denied employment to the petitioners.

5. It is beyond dispute that the petitioners are W.P.(C).No.3950 of 2013 3 persons enlisted by the Panchayat for sand mining at the disputed Kadavu, in accordance with the provisions of the Rules. The Rules do not provide the manner in which the workers are to be selected, in the event of insufficient work. In so far as the work in question is not a regular one, in the absence of any provision in the Rules, the proper course should be to give equal opportunity to all the enlisted workers by engaging them on rotation basis. In the said view of the matter, the question whether petitioners are persons enlisted during the year 2012 or not need not be considered.

6. In the circumstances, respondents 4 and 5 are directed to engage the enlisted workers, on a rotation basis to carry out the sand mining activities at Podavoor Kadavu.

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE smv