IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 5TH JUNE 2008 / 15TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 25539 of 2004(M) --------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: -------------------- 1. GANGADHARAN. T., S/O. RAMAN, AGED 33 YEARS, THAZHATHUVAYAL, KUMBLERY P.O., MEANANGADY, WAYANAD, FIELD SUPERVISOR. 2. SIVADASAN E.G., S/O. GOPALAN, AGED 35 YEARS, FIELD SUPERVISOR, ELAYATH HOUSE, MYLAMPADY P.O., MEENANGADY. 3. SASIDHARAN. V.S., S/O. SANKARAN, AGED 30 YEARS, FIELD SUPERVISOR, VAKERI HOUSE, VAKERY P.O., SULTHAN BATHERI, WAYANAD. 4. VIJAYAN. K., S/O. CHANDAN, AGED 34 YEARS, FIELD SUPERVISOR, KOLLANCHAL HOUSE, MENANGADY P.O. 5. GOPINATHAN. E., S/O. KURUMAN, AGED 41 YEARS, FACTORY SUPERVISOR, PRIYADARSINI TEA ESTATE, PANCHARAKOLLI, PILAKKAVU P.O., MANANTHAVADY. 6. RAGHAVAN THOPPY, S/O THOPPY, AGED 30 YEARS, PRIYADARSINI TEA ESTATE, PANCHARAKOLLI, PILAKKAVU P.O. 7. HARRY M.S., S/O. SEKHARAN, AGED 30 YEARS, MATHAMULA HOUSE, CHOOTHUPARA P.O., MANIKAVU, WAYANAD, FACTORY SUPERVISOR. 8. RAJAN GAURI. P.M., S/O. MARAN, AGED 35 YEARS, PRIYADARSINI TEA ESTATE, PANCHARAKOLLI, PILAKKAVU P.O. 9. O.C. KRISHNAN, S/O. CHIMBAN, AGED 34 YEARS, ODAKUTTY HOUSE, MOODAKOLLY P.O., VAKERI, WAYANAD, FACTORY SUPERVISOR. 10. SAJU. P., S/O. BALAKRISHNAN. E., AGED 31 YEARS, PARAL HOUSE, CHRUKULATHUR P.O., KOZHIKODE, ELECTRICAL SUPERVISOR. W.P.(C).25539/2004 11. O.K. MADHAVAN, S/O. KUNJANPILLAI, AGED 49 YEARS, MECHANIC CUM BLACK SMITH, PRIYADARSINI, TEA ESTATE, PANCHASRAKOLLI, PILAKKAVU P.O. 12. DIL BAHADUR, S/O. RAMSINGH, 47 YEARS, SECURITY STAFF, PRIYADARSINI TEA ESTATE, PANCHARAKOLLI, PILAKKAVU P.O. BY ADV. SRI.P.P.JACOB RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF TRIBAL WELFARE, SECRETARIATE, TRIVANDRUM. 2. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 3. MANANTHAVADY TRIBAL PLANTATION OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.W 26, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WAYANAD. 5. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.K.RAVIKRISHNAN -R1, R2, R4 & R5. SRI.M.SASINDRAN - R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/06/2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).25539/2004 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE BYELAW CLAUSE 19 OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONERS THROUGH UNION BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS DATED 28/08/97. EXT.P3:- COPY OF JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.5364/98 DATED 20/05/98. EXT.P4:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 27/03/98. EXT.P5:- COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION IN MATHRUBHUMI DAILY DATED 10/07/2004. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY RS/ THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.25539 of 2004-M = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 5th day of June, 2008. JUDGMENT 1.The third respondent is a co-operative society. According to the petitioners, they are workers in a Tea Estate of the third respondent. They claim parity in pay, with employees of different establishments under the Government, on the principle of equal pay for equal work. Disputed questions of facts have been raised at the instance of the Government on the claim raised by the petitioners. 2.Be that as it may, in the realm of labour laws, it is not necessary for this Court to step in, primarily because, though the third respondent is a co-operative society, it would also be an establishment and an employer for the purpose of the industrial laws. Therefore, it would not be WP(C)25539/2004 -: 2 :- advisable for the Government to take a view one way or the other notwithstanding the participation of Government officers in the management of the third respondent. The rights of the petitioners as workers under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 include their entitlement to have their claims put for conciliation by the competent officer and on failure of any such conciliation, for consideration of the Government for making a reference to the appropriate authority for adjudicating an industrial dispute. For the aforesaid reasons, this writ petition is ordered without granting the reliefs sought for in the writ petition, however directing that if the petitioners or majority among them move the appropriate authority under the Industrial Disputes Act for conciliation of the dispute with the third respondent, the said authority shall take appropriate action in accordance with law and send a report of such conciliation, if necessary, to the Government for further action in terms of the WP(C)25539/2004 -: 3 :- Industrial Disputes Act. Such action shall be taken within an outer limit of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and the date of the petitioners making a request, whichever is later. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/0906