Kerala High Court
Kerala State Forest Loading Headload ... vs Abdul Latheef on 24 January, 2012
Author: P.N.Ravindran
Bench: P.N.Ravindran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2012/13TH MAGHA 1933
WPC.No. 1130 of 2012 (M)
------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
KERALA STATE FOREST LOADING HEADLOAD AND GENERAL (FLHG)WORKERS
UNION(KTUC)(M), REG.NO.573/80, MAMBAZHATHARA
URUKUNNU P.O., KOLLAM
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY P.CHANDRASEKHARAN.
BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. ABDUL LATHEEF,
PROPRIETOR, VELLATHARAYIL INDUSTRIES, MALAMURY
PULLUVAZY P.O., PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM-683 541.
2. KERALA GOVERNMENT TIMBER DEPOT WORKERS UNION
REG.NO.245/88, WAHED BUILDING, IDAPPALAYAM
KAZHUTHURUTTY, ARYANKAVU, KOLLAM-691 309
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MAMBAZHATHARA SALIM.
3. KOLLAM JIJLLA LOADING AND UNLOADING WORKERS CONGRESS (INTUC)
REG.NO.25/79, URUKUNNU P.O., MAMBAZHATHARAN-691 307
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT K.SASIDHARAN.
4. ALL INDIA TRADE UNION CONGRESS (AITUC)
KAZHUTHURUTTY, ARYANKAVU, KOLLAM-691 309
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SIBIL BABU.
5. CENTER FOR INDIA TRADE UNION (CITU)
KAZHUTHURUTTY, ARYANKAVU, KOLLAM-691 309
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY C.RAJAN.
6. KUNJUMON
INDIAN NATIONAL TRADE UNION CONGRESS (I)
PUTHENKADAVU, MAMBAZHATHARA, KOLLAM-691 307.
7. RAJAPPAN,
INDIAN NATIONAL TRADE UNION CONGRESS (I)
PUTHEN KADAVU, MAMBAZHATHARA, KOLLAM-691 307.
8. THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER
KOLLAM-691 001.
WPC.No. 1130 of 2012 (M)
9. THE REGIONAL JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER
OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER
KOLLAM - 691001.
Addl.10. INDIAN NATIONAL TRADE UNION CONGRESS(I) (INTUC-I)
KAZHUTHURUTTY UNIT, EDAPPALAYAM P.O.
KOLLAM DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SURESH SADASIVAN.
Addl.11. ALL INDIA TRADE UNION CONGRESS (AITUC)
KAZHUTHURUTTY UNIT, KAZHUTHURUTTY PO.
KOLLAM DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MR.ABDUL KHADAR
Addl.12. CENTER FOR INDIAN TRADE UNION (CITU)
KAZHUTHURUTTY UNIT, KAZHUTHURUTTY PO.
KOLLAM DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MR.R.PRADEEP.
ADDL.R10 TO R12 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 24.01.2012 IN
IA.1105/2012
R1 BY SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.)
R1 BY SMT.SARITHA DAVID CHUNKATH
R1 BY SMT.SMITHA GEORGE
R2 BY SRI.B.MOHANLAL
R2 BY SRI.T.PRASAD
R2 BY SRI.SAIJU S.
R2 BY SRI.C.SINOY
BY SRI.K.SIJU
BY SMT.BINDU GEORGE
BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. ANITHA RAVINDRAN FOR R8 & R9
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
02-02-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WPC.No. 1130 of 2012 (M)
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS EXHIBITS
P1: COPY OF ORDER DATED 20/12/2008 OF THE ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER,
PUNALUR.
P2: COPY OF AGREEMENT DATED 25/09/2011 ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE 1ST
RESPONDENT AND 2ND RESPONDENT & ORS.
P3: COPY OF INTERIM ORDER DATED 21/12/2011 IN WPC NO. 32971/2011.
P4: COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 21/12/2011 IN WPC NO. 32971/2011.
P5: COPY OF ORDER DATED 30/12/2011 PASSED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT.
P6: COPY OF ORDER DATED 09/01/2012 ISSUED BY THE 9TH RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:
R2(A): COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL NO.1/2012 FILED BY THIS
RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 9TH RESPONDENT.
R10(A): COPY OF INTERIM ORDER PASSED BY THE REGIONAL JOINT LABOUR
COMMISSIONER IN HLA NO.2/2012 DATED 09/01/2012.
/TRUE COPY/
PA TO JUDGE
ds
P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.C.No.1130 OF 2012
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2012
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is a trade union representing a section of the Headload Workers in Nagamala ward of Thenmala Grama Panchayath in Kollam District. A dispute between the members of the petitioner trade union and members of the unions arrayed as respondents 2 to 7 and additional respondents 10 to 12 was adjudicated upon by the District Labour Officer, Kollam in accordance with the provisions contained in the Kerala Headload Workers Act, 1978. By Ext. P5 order dated 30/12/2011, the District Labour Officer held that the work should be evenly distributed among the different groups of employees. Aggrieved thereby, the 2nd respondent trade union has filed appeal No. HLA01/2012 before the Regional Joint Labour Commissioner, Kollam, the appellate authority constituted under the Kerala Headload Workers Act, 1978. In that appeal the appellate authority passed Ext. P6 order staying the operation of Ext. P5 order and directed the parties to maintain the status quo. Ext.P6 order is under challenge in this writ petition. W.P.C.No.1130 OF 2012 -2-
2. The main ground raised in this writ petition is that under sub-section (8) of section 21 of the Kerala Headload Workers Act, the decision of the Conciliation Officer can be stayed only under exceptional circumstances, that exceptional circumstances have been made out and therefore, Ext. P6 interim order is liable to be set aside. It is also stated that the appellate authority has not given any reason at all when it passed the impugned order.
3. This writ petition was admitted and notice ordered to the respondents on 13/1/2012. On that day this Court also stayed the operation and implementation of Ext. P6. When this writ petition came up for hearing to day, the learned counsel on both sides submitted that having regard the nature of the dispute and the urgency felt by both sides, the writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the 9th respondent to dispose of the appeal wherein Ext. P6 interim order was passed and also appeal No. HLA 02/2012 filed by the additional 10th respondent, within a time limit to be fixed by this Court. The learned counsel on both sides submitted since all the parties to the appeals are W.P.C.No.1130 OF 2012 -3- before this Court, this Court may fix a date for the parties to appear before the Regional Labour Commission so as to enable the Regional Labour Commission to hear the appeal and pass appropriate orders thereon expeditiously. The learned counsel on both sides also invited my attention to sub-section (7) of Section 21 of the Act which stipulates that appeals shall be disposed of within two weeks from the date of presentation of the appeal.
In the light of the fact that the law mandates an early disposal of the appeals and the parties are willing to have the appeals disposed of expeditiously, I dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the 9th respondent to pass orders on HLA01/2012 and HLA02/2012 expeditiously in any event within two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment from either of the parties. Until such time as the appeals are heard and disposed of, the interim order passed by this Court on 13/01/2012 shall continue to operate. The contentions of both sides on the merits are kept open.
P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE.
ds