IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2011 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 7926 of 2011(M) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- T.P.JACOB PAUL,S/O.PAUL, PROPRIETOR, VENAD LOGISTICS, PARCEL SERVICE XVII/269 A.LUCIYA TILES COMPOUND,MARATHAKKARA.P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA. BY ADV. SRI.G.BALAMURALEEDHARAN (PARAVUR) RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE SUPERINTEDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR-680 001. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, OLLUR POLICE STATION,THRISSUR-680 306. 3. INTUC UNIT,MARATHAKKARA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,MARATHAKKARA,THRISSUR-680 320. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.M.CHARISMA R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.A.ABRAHAM SRI.BIJU MARTIN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.7926/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE LICENCE NO.AS-569/10-11 DATED 15/01/2011, ISSUED FROM PUTHUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT. P2 COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED TO WORKER NAMED NIRANJAN. P2(A) COPY OF THE ISSUED TO PHULAJEN. P2(B) COPY OF THE ISSUED TO SOORAJKUMAR. P2(C) COPY OF THE ISSUED TO VISWANATHAN. P2(D) COPY OF THE ISSUED TO ROY.K.A. P3 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 19/02/2011 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P4 COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OBTAINED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 19/02/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R3(A) COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE UNION TO THE DLO TRICHUR DATED 14/3/2011. /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO.JUDGE sts R. BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 7926 of 2011-M ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant,J. The petitioner - the Proprietor of an establishment by name `Venad Logistics' has come before this Court complaining about the illegal obstruction by the 3rd respondent - Trade Union and its members against the peaceful and orderly conduct of loading and unloading work in the petitioner's establishment. 2. According to the petitioner, the petitioner has got attached registered workers under Ext.P2 series (5 in number). It is the case of the petitioner that he has three more registered workers. The petitioner asserts that he has the legal right to get the work of loading and unloading in his establishment done by his attached registered workers. Illegal obstructions are being raised by the 3rd respondent. Direction may be granted, it is prayed. 3. The 3rd respondent has entered appearance. According to the 3rd respondent, the registration of workers as attached workers of the petitioner is absolutely incorrect. The petitioner W.P.(C) No. 7926 of 2011 -: 2 :- wants to challenge the same. Any direction issued may be subject to and without prejudice to the challenge which the 3rd respondent wants to raise against the said alleged registration. The learned counsel for the 3rd respondent further submits that it may be zealously insisted that the attached workers are permitted to work only for the petitioner for his work as Proprietor of Venad Logistics and not for any other work. The 3rd respondent apprehends that the registration cards may be used clandestinely to get the work of loading and unloading done in a nearby establishment by name Luzia Tiles also. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the challenge, if any, against the registration of workers shall be resisted appropriately if proceedings are initiated. It is further submited that under no circumstances shall the registered workers be used for any work other than the work of Venad Logistics. 5. When this matter came up for hearing on 18/3/11, the following interim order was passed by this Court: “There shall be an interim direction to respondents 1 and 2 to afford protection to the petitioner to get the loading and unloading work in his establishment done W.P.(C) No. 7926 of 2011 -: 3 :- by the attached registered workers of his establishment as seen from Ext.P2 series. We make it clear that this interim order will not enable the petitioner to get the work done by any one other than attached registered workers of his establishment under Rule 26A of the Kerala Headload Workers Rules.” 6. The learned Government Pleader submits that the interim order dated 18/3/11 is being enforced. The same can be made absolute now, it is submitted. 7. We have considered all the relevant inputs. We are satisfied that subject to appropriate safeguards the interim order dated 18/3/11 can be made absolute. 8. In the result: (a) This writ petition is allowed. (b) The interim order dated 18/3/11 extracted above is made absolute. (c) It is made clear that this order shall be subject to and without prejudice to the right of the 3rd respondent to challenge registration of workmen as attached workers of the petitioner in accordance with law. W.P.(C) No. 7926 of 2011 -: 4 :- (d) It is made further clear that this order shall not entitle the petitioner for police protection for any work other than that of Venad Logistics. Sd/- R. BASANT (Judge) Sd/- K. SURENDRA MOHAN (Judge) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge