IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH MARCH 2008 / 22ND PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 27242 of 2007(R) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ M/S.POPULAR STORES, PARAKANDY, KANNUR,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SRI. P.P. ABDUL SALAM.. BY ADV. SRI.A.MOHAMED MUSTAQUE SRI.M.K.SUMOD SRI.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH SRI.K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH) RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, HEAD LOAD WORKERS UNION, CITU, CALICUT. 2. THE SECRETARY, HEAD LOAD WORKERS UNION, CITU,WAYANAD. 3. THE SECRETARY, HEAD LOAD WORKERS UNION, INTUC, CALICUT.. 4. THE SECRETARY, HEAD LOAD WORKERS UNION, INTUC, KANNUR. 5. THE SECRETARY, HEAD LOAD WORKERS UNION, INTUC, KASARAGODE. 6. THE SECRETARY, HEAD LOAD WORKERS UNION, INTUC, WAYANAD. 7. THE SECRETARY, HEAD LOAD WORKERS UNION, BMS, CALICUT. 8. THE SECRETARY, HEAD LOAD WORKERS UNION,BMS KANNUR. 9. THE SECRETARY, HEAD LOAD WORKERS UNION, BMS, KASARAGOD. 10. THE SECRETARY, HEAD LOAD WORKERS UNION, STU, KANNUR. WP(C).No. 27242 of 2007 11. THE SECRETARY, HEAD LOAD WORKERS UNION, STU, KASARAGOD. 12. THE SECRETARY, HEAD LOAD WORKERS STU, WAYANAD. 13. THE KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE FUND COMMITTEE, CALICUT. 14. THE KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE FUND COMMITTEE,KANNUR. 15. THE KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE FUND COMMITTEE,KASARAGOD. 16. THE KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE FUND COMMITTEE,WAYANAD. 17. THE KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE FUND COMMITTEE,PAYYANNUR. 18. THE CHAIRMAN, KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD, KERALA,S.R.M.ROAD, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.KOSHY GEORGE, SC, KHLWWB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 27242 of 2007 APPENDIX EXT.P1: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.6861/03 DTD 30.10.2003 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE REQUEST MADE BY THE PETITIONER DTD 15.02.06. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE VOUCHER ISSUED BY WORKERS. EXT.P3(a): -DO- -DO- EXT.P3(b): -DO- -DO- EXT.P3(c): -DO- -DO- TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.27242 OF 2007 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a business concern engaged in wholesale distribution of consumer durables at various places. This is done by transporting the consumer durables from their place of manufacture to various outlets in delivery vans. Headload work involved in such delivery is effected by own employees of the petitioner accompanying the goods in the van. Respondents 1 to 12 used to obstruct the delivery by the petitioner of the goods at the outlets, against which the petitioner obtained an order of police protection by Ext.P1 order of this Court. In spite of the same, respondents 1 to 12 continued the obstruction. In the above circumstances, the petitioner complained to respondents 13 to 17 to take appropriate action against the offending headload workers, who are members of respondents 1 to 12 unions under Section 18 of the Kerala Headload Workers Act. The petitioner's grievance is that in spite of receipt of complaints in this regard, respondents 13 to 17 are not taking appropriate W.P.(c) No.27242/07 2 steps to enforce the provisions of Section 18 of the Act by initiating and completing appropriate action against the offending workers in accordance with the provisions of the Kerala Headload Workers Act. They therefore seek the following reliefs. “(i) issue a Writ of Mandamus or such other Writ or order directing respondents 13 -17 to take appropriate legal action against offending Head load workers who are members of respondents 1-12 from causing obstruction to the petitioner while delivering the consumer goods and other articles to various retail outlets using covered sales van. ii) issue a Writ of Mandamus or such other Writ or order directing respondents 13- 17 to do such action necessary for preventing members of the respondents 1-12 from causing obstruction to the petitioner while delivering the consumer goods and articles to various retail outlets using covered sales van.” 2. Respondents 13 to 17 have filed a counter affidavit stating that they are willing to take action against the offending workers. But according to them, they have not been furnished with sufficient information for the same. They would submit that what they have received is only Ext.P2, which does not contain any specific instance of obstruction but only a general complaint that the petitioner is being obstructed by W.P.(c) No.27242/07 3 respondents 1 to 12. They would further assure this Court that as and when a specific complaint about a specific incident is received, respondents 13 to 17 would make appropriate enquiries in the matter and if any persons registered as headload worker is found to be contravening any provisions of the Act, appropriate action as warranted by law would be taken against them by respondents 13 to 17. In view of the above assurance, I record the same and direct respondents 13 to 17 to act in accordance with that assurance, as and when the petitioner files complaints giving details of specific instances of obstruction by any headload worker registered under the Act. The writ petition is disposed of as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd W.P.(c) No.27242/07 4