IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN MONDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2009 / 5TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 20365 of 2009(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ALEX.P.CYRIAC,PERUMALIL GRANITE CONSTRUCTIONS,ARUNNOOTTIMANGALAM,PERUVA, KOTTAYAM-686604. BY ADV. SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,KARUNAGAPPALLY POLICE STATION,KARUNAGAPPALLY. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY POLICE STATION,KARUNAGAPPALLY. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA REP.BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (HOME),SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. ROY KAPPATTUR,PRESIDENT(I.N.T.U.C.UNIT), HEAD WORKERS UNION,ALAPPATTU PANCHAYAT, CHERIAZHEEKAL.P.O,KARUNAGAPPALLY,KOLLAM. 5. SHAROJUDIN MUSALIAR,(SECRETARY(C.I.T.U. UNIT)HEAD LOAD WORKERS UNION,ALAPPATTU PANCHAYAT, CHERIAZHEEKAL.P.O,KARUNAGAPPALLY,KOLLAM. 6. P.SUGATHAN,(U.T.U.C.UNIT),HEAD LOAD WORKERS UNION,ALAPPATTU PANCHAYAT, CHERIAZHEEKAL.P.O,KARUNAGAPPALLY,KOLLAM. 7. IBRAHIMKUTTY,SECRETARY,A.I.T.U.C.UNIT) HEAD LOAD WORKERS UNION,ALAPPATTU PANCHAYAT, CHERIAZHEEKAL.P.O,KARUNAGAPPALLY,KOLLAM. 8. V.SASIKUMAR,PRESIDENT,A.P.P.P.T AND M.A.G,WORKERS UNION,PANDARATHURUTHU, CHRIAZHEEKAL.P.O,KARUNAGAPPALLY,KOLLAM. W.P.(C) No.20365 of 2009 : 2 : 9. S.KRISHNAN,PRESIDENT,PANDARATHURUTHU KARAYOGAM,PANDARATHURUTHU,CHERIAZHEEKAL.P.O, KARUNAGAPPALLY,KOLLAM. 10. P.KUNJUMON @ RAJU,PRESIDENT, VELLANATHURUTHU KARAYOGAM,VELLANATHURUTHU, CHERIAZHEEKAL.P.O,KARUNAGAPPALLY,KOLLAM. ADDL.11. INDIAN RARE EARTHS LTD., REP. BY ITS SECRETARY OFFICE OF THE INDIAN RARE EARTHS LIMITED CHAVARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. (IMPLEADED AS ADDL. R11 AS PER ORDER DATED 20.7.2009 IN I.A.NO.9005 OF 2009) BY ADV. SRI.K.SUBASH CHANDRA BOSE FOR R 9 &10 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C) NO.20365 OF 2009 EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 10.6.2009 INTIMATING THE AWARD OF CONTRACT TO THE PETITIONER BY THE INDIAN RARE EARTHS LTD. EXT.P1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10.6.2009 INTIMATING THE AWARD OF CONTRACT TO THE PETITIONER BY THE INDIAN RARE EARTHS LIMITED. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2(a) TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT SHOWING THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE PETITION DATED 23.6.2009. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER TO THE INDIAN RARE EARTHS LIMITED. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.8 DATED 3.7.2009. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. P.R.RAMAN & P.BHAVADASAN, JJ. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.20365 of 2009 ------------------------------- Dated this the 27th July, 2009 J U D G M E N T Raman, J. The petitioner who is a Contractor under the Indian Rare Earths Limited has undertaken the civil work for construction of a security wall. When the petitioner has started executing the work, respondents 4 to 10 insisted for payment of Nokku Coolie. According to the petitioner, he does not require any manual labour force to complete the work. But even then, respondents are insisting for payment of Rs.1200/= per load, irrespective of whether they are engaged or not and causing obstruction. Hence, this petition for police protection. 2. Respondents 9 and 10 have entered appearance and filed a counter affidavit. The allegations made in the writ petition are denied. It is submitted that the matter pertaining to the claim made by the respondents for employment is pending W.P.(C) No.20365/2009 2 consideration before the Assistant Labour Officer, Karunagappally. It is also submitted that even for doing the mechanical work, some labourers have to be engaged. It is also stated that because of the mining done by the Indian Rare Earths, fisherman community lose their jobs and they are only insisting for giving preference for their employment. 3. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that the work presently awarded to the petitioner is being carried on with mechanical force and according to him, what is demanded is Nokku Coolie. 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, after hearing all concerned, we direct that so long as the security wall construction is done with mechanical force, there is no room for any obstruction being caused by respondents insisting for employment, and therefore, if there is any obstruction, police shall necessarily remove such obstruction. However, if any manual labour is required except for operating the mechanical vehicle, which is a skilled job, then necessarily preference shall W.P.(C) No.20365/2009 3 be given to the members of respondents 4 to 10, who are local people, and only if sufficient number of employees are not obtained, then the petitioner shall engage outsiders. But this will not stand in the way of the Assistant Labour Officer in arriving at an amicable settlement. The writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.BHAVADASAN , JUDGE. nj.