IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON SATURDAY, THE 30TH JANUARY 2010 / 10TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 18371 of 2006(K) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. SABU T.N., THAREPARAMBIL HOUSE, KARTHEDOM, MALIPURAM P.O., PIN - 682 511. 2. MOHANAN P.V., KAPPATTIPARAMBIL HOUSE, NEAR A.J.HALL, KALOOR, COCHIN-682 017. 3. K.K. ASHOK KUMAR, KEENATH HOUSE, PULIYANAM P.O., ANGAMALY - 683 572. 4. N.V. CHANDRAN, NADUVILEDATH HOUSE, S.N.LANE, VADUTHALA P.O., KOCHI-682 023. 5. K.S. MAHENDRAN, KALARIKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, ELANKUNNAPUZHA P.O., PIN - 682 503. 6. T.P. BALACHANDRAN NAIR, T.C.COLONY, HOUSE NO.34, UDYOGAMANDAL P.O. 7. STEPHEN ANTONY E.J., ELENJICKAL HOUSE, H.NO.XII/49, NEAR SUJATHA THEATRE, PANDIKUDY, KOCHI-682 002. 8. K.P. JOY, KARTHIKASSERY HOUSE, NAZARETH, KOCHI-2. 9. POULOSE P.K., PARAYIL HOUSE, PULIYANAM P.O., PAMPAKUDA VIA, PIN-683 572. BY MR.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADV. MR.S.SUJIN. WP(C).No. 18371 of 2006(K) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE TRAVANCORE COCHIN CHEMICALS LTD., UDYOGAMANDAL P.O., KERALA - REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRAVANCORE COCHIN CHEMICALS LTD., UDYOGAMANDAL P.O., KOCHI. R1 & R2 BY MR.A.M.SHAFFIQUE, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADV. MR.E.K.NANDAKUMAR, MR.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR, MR.ANIL D. NAIR, SMT.A.SIRJI . THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/01/2010, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 738 OF 2006, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 18371 of 2006(K) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 22/08/1996 IN O.P. NO. 9567/1994 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.A. NO. 1488/1996 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 23/01/2001. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE SENT BY THE PETITIONER'S COUNSEL ON 13/12/2005. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R1(a): COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED IN WP(C) NO. 738/2006 DATED 26/07/2006. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------- W.P(C) Nos.738/2006 -K & 18371/2006-K -------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of January, 2010. J U D G M E N T The issue involved in both these cases is as to the right of the petitioners to be employed as workers/helpers of the respondent company, though they were sent out earlier while working as temporary workers/helpers for giving appointment to the regular hands. 2. The case of the petitioners is that they were sponsored by Employment Exchanges and were appointed after an interview conducted by the Selection Committee of the respondent company as temporary workers/helpers and were continuing as such for quite number of years. However, without any regard to the vested right of the petitioners to be regularised in service and contrary to the mandate under the Industrial Disputes Act, the service was terminated by the respondent company to appoint regular workers which was challenged by filing Original Petitions before this Court (O.P.Nos.9943/1994 and 9967/1994) wherein Ext.P1 verdict was passed declining interference. Aggrieved by the judgment passed W.P(C) Nos.738/2006 -K & 18371/2006-K 2 by the learned Single Judge, the matter was taken up before the Division Bench by filing W.A.No.1525 of 1996 and 1488 of 1996 , which led to Ext.P2 judgment, whereby, though no interference was made on merits, the petitioners/appellants were permitted to file a representation for appropriate reliefs before the respondent company. Accordingly they filed necessary representation as borne by Ext.P3 in W.P(C) No.18371 of 2006 and Ext.P4 in the other case. Since no further decision has been taken by the respondent company, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing the above Writ Petitions seeking for appropriate reliefs. 3. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side. It is brought to the notice of this Court that an interim order passed by this Court directing the respondent company to consider the representation. It is also stated that the stand of the company at that point of time was that, no vacancies were available to accommodate the petitioners because of financial constraints and that even the existing staff/workers were being sent out as in excess and hence that no favourable orders could be passed in the said representation. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners have W.P(C) Nos.738/2006 -K & 18371/2006-K 3 now brought up the matter for further consideration of this Court, pointing out that there is a drastic change and the financial position of the company got improved and that the company has issued a notification for effecting 'fresh recruitment', under which circumstance, the grievance of the petitioners as projected in the Writ Petitions is liable to be considered by the respondent company. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances, the respondents are directed to consider Ext.P3 representation in W.P(C) No.18371 of 2006 and Ext.P4 in the other case, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, of course after giving an opportunity of hearing to a representative of the petitioners; which shall be finalised at any rate within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petitions are disposed of accordingly. Sd/- P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge ab W.P(C) Nos.738/2006 -K & 18371/2006-K 4