IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2011 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 30446 of 2006(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- COCHIN THURAMUGHA THOZHILALI UNION, REGD. OFFICE AT KOCHI, REP. BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY A.A.KOCHUNNI, S/O. ABDUL KHADER ARAKKAL, AGED 85, SOCIAL WORKER, RESIDING AT ARAKKAL HOUSE, PANAYAPPILLY, KOCHI-3. BY ADVS. SRI.P.F.THOMAS, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.DILEEP VARGHESE SRI.C.S.YESUDAS SMT.M.J.SAJITHA SRISHIJU VARGHEESE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. COCHIN PORT TRUST, WILLINGDON ISLAND, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, OFFICE OF THE COCHIN PORT TRUST, WILLINGDON ISLAND, KOCHI. 2. CHAIRMAN, KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE FUND, P.B.NO.2017, S.R.M.ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-18. 3. ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER, OOLIMUGHAL, KAKKANADU, COCHIN-30. 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, POLICE COMMISSIONERATE, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31. 5. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R3 - R5 R2 BY ADVS.SRI.BABU KARUKAPPADATH, SC,KHLWWB SRI.RENIL ANTO KANDAMKULATHY,SC,KHLWWB SRI.KOSHY GEORGE, SC, KHLWWB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03.11.2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 30446 of 2006(Y ------------------------- APPENDIX --------- PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS --------------------- EXT.P1. COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE, KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD, DATED 10.11.2006. EXT.P2. COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF SETTLMENT (AGREEMENT) DATED, 9.1.2001. EXT.P3. COPY OF THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE TRAFFIC MANAGER, DATED 10.11.2006 EXT.P4. COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT WITH FORWARDING LETTER ISSUED BY ASST. LABOUR COMMISSIONER CENTRAL , ERNAKULAM, DATED 6.10.2000 EXT.P5. COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT WITH FORWARDING LETTER DATED 27.1.2000 EXT.P6. COPY OF THE LETTER ISUED BY THE GENERAL SECRETARY CITU, DATED 14.11.2006 EXT.P7. COPY OF THE REPLY ISSUED BY THE ASST. LABOUR COMMISSIONER © ERNAKULAM DATED 14.11.2006 EXT.P8. COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ADDRESSED TO THE CHAIRMAN KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD DATED 14.11.2006. EXT.P9. COPY OF THE ADVERTISEMENT IN MATHRUBHUMI MALAYALAM DAILY DATED 15.11.2006. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL ---------------------- / TRUE COPY / P.A. TO JUDGE VK S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 30446 of 2006 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 3rd day of November, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a registered trade union of workers working in the Cochin Port area. They are aggrieved by the action of the Government in implementing the provisions of the Kerala Headload Workers Act and Rules to the head load workers in Cochin Port area. According to the petitioners, the State Government has no power to implement the provisions of the Kerala Head load Workers Act and Rules in the Cochin Port area, which is controlled by the Central Government. The petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “(a) quash Ext.P1 and P3 and other consequential directions or orders by a writ of certiorari such other writ or direction to declare that the various categories of employees of head load workers working within the Cochin Port and employed in various establishments and firms who are members of the petitioner union are governed by the various conciliation settlements and conciliation settlements and bipartite settlements entered with managements by the petitioner union which are still in enforce and are not terminated and the appropriate Government so far as these workers are concerned is the Central Government and the Central Labour Commissioner and his subordinates entitled to interfere in the disputes and bring it to a settlement and the Kerala Head load Workers Act is not applicable to the members of the union who are loading and unloading workers; (b) restrain the respondents 1, 2 & 5 from making any attempt to implement the provisions of the Act through the machinery of the Government and including the police and such proceedings will be illegal arbitrary and capricious and prevent from enforcing the same among the workers in the Cochin Port Trust.” W.P(C) No. 30446 of 2006 -: 2 :- 2. After considering the arguments of all parties, a learned Judge of this Court had passed an interim order dated 21.11.2006, which reads thus: “I heard the learned senior counsel Mr. P.F. Thomas for the petitioner, the learned Advocate General appearing for respondents 3 to 5, the learned standing counsel for the 1st respondent Port Trust and also the learned standing counsel for the Kerala Head Load Workers Welfare Fund Board. Though various contentions were raised by the writ petitioner, I feel that this Court can redress only one grievance of the petitioner, concerning registration of the head load workers with the Head Load Workers Welfare Fund Board. The learned counsel for the petitioner points out that there is substantial number of workmen, who are doing the loading and unloading work in the area, but, without registration under Rule 26A of the Kerala Head Load Workers' Rules. Only persons with registration under the said Rule are eligible for getting registration under the Welfare Fund Board. Having regard to the submissions made at the bar, including those made on behalf of the State, is is ordered that the workmen, who are actually engaged in the loading and unloading work under the jurisdiction of the local committee of the Welfare Fund Board can move the Assistant Labour Officer, concerned for registration under Rule 26A of the above said Rules. If such applications are filed, the Assistant Labour Officer shall hold an enquiry into their claim for registration, taking into account, the relevant facts as per the Rules and dispose of the same, within one month from the date of receipt of the applications, provided, they are filed within two weeks from today. The persons who get the registration under Rule 26A shall be given a chance to get themselves registered under the Head Load Workers Welfare Fund Board within two weeks thereafter.” 3. The learned Government Pleader points out that later, the petitioner has filed a Review Petition, which was dismissed. The matter was taken in appeal before the W.P(C) No. 30446 of 2006 -: 3 :- Division Bench and the Division Bench also dismissed the appeal. I am in full agreement with the said order and am of opinion that the writ petition itself can be disposed of in terms of that order. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of in terms of the above order. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/