IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 14TH MARCH 2011 / 23RD PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 7403 of 2011(A) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- PRADEESH M.K., AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.LATE RAGHAVAN, PRAS MAHEL, TEMPLE GATE P.O., THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT, NOW R/AT. PAYYAPPAILLIL HOUSE, KAVARA PARAMBU, NAYATHODU P.O., ANGAMALY-683572. BY ADV. SRI.K.SABU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER (ENFORCEMENT), DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANADU, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANADU, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER (ENFORCEMENT), DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BASANT BALAJI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N. RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.7403 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner who was employed in a hotel as a Linen Room Staff has filed this writ petition seeking a direction to respondents 1 to 3 to consider the representations submitted by him, copies of which are marked as Exts.P10, P10(a), P10(b) and P10(c) respectively. 2. When the writ petition came up for hearing, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents was directed to get instructions from the employer as the employer is not on the party array. The learned Government Pleader accordingly took instructions and submitted that for unauthorised absence, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner and he has submitted his reply. It is stated that after considering the reply submitted by the petitioner the management will take an appropriate decision in the matter and that the petitioner can be said to be aggrieved only if punishment is imposed on him and till such time, the Labour Officer does not come in to the picture. 3. It is evident from the submissions made by the learned Government Pleader that the employer has only initiated disciplinary W.P.(C) No.7403 of 2011 2 action against the petitioner. In such circumstances, it will be pre- mature for the respondents to enquire into the complaint set out in Exts.P10 to P10(c) representations. The petitioner will have to wait till enquiry is completed before he can raise a dispute before the appropriate authority. I therefore find no grounds to entertain the writ petition. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to raise a dispute after the enquiry against him is concluded. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. nj.