IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS MONDAY, THE 1ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 3244 of 2010(E) ------------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------------- COCHIN GRANITES,6/12A, ACHANKAVALA, MADAKKATHANAM P.O., MANJALLUR VILLAGE REP.BY ITS PROPREITOR, THERESA JOSE, W/O. AJAY JOSE, AGED 36 YEARS, KARUMACHERIL HOUSE, MUNDAMVELI P.O., PALLURUTHY VILLGE, KOCHI TALUK, ERNAKULAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM (RURAL), ALUVA. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MOOVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLCIE, VAZHAKKULAM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 5. BASHEER, KAMPAKATHINKAL HOUSE, MADAKKATHANAM P.O. PIN-686670. 6. DINESH, THAZHATHUKUDIYIL, FURNITURE, MADAKKATHANAM P.O. PIN-686670. 7. VINOD, S/O.MOHANAN, PALLIPATT HOUSE, MADAKKATHANAM P.O., PIN-686670 8. MANU,KANNATT HOUSE, MADAKKATHANAM P.O., PIN-686670 W.P.(C).NO.3244 OF 2010 E 9. NIZHAD, S/O. BASHEER, KAMPAKATHINKAL HOUSE, MADAKKATHANAM P.O. PIN-686670 10. NOUSHAD,KAMPAKATHINAKL HOUSE, MADAKKATHANAM P.O.,PIN-686670. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI T.K. VIPINDAS. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C).NO.3244 OF 2010 E PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 16.6.2009 SUBMITTED BY SAID MR. K.M. LUKACHAN BEFORE THE ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER (ALO), MOOVATTUPUZHA. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 16.6.2009 SUBMITTED BY SAID MR. REJEESH K.M. BEFORE THE ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER (ALO), MOOVATTUPUZHA. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 16.6.2009 SUBMITTED BY SAID MR. SUDHEESH M.K. BEFORE THE ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER (ALO), MOOVATTUPUZHA. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 16.6.2009 SUBMITTED BY SAID MR. JOJO LUKACHAN BEFORE THE ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER (ALO), MOOVATTUPUZHA. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 16.6.2009 SUBMITTED BY SAID MR. THANKACHAN BEFORE THE ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER (ALO), MOOVATTUPUZHA. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 16.6.2009 SUBMITTED BY SAID MR. TOM THOMAS BEFORE THE ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER (ALO), MOOVATTUPUZHA. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE SAID REPRESENTATION DATED 26.1.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT WITH COPY TO THE SECOND, THIRD AND FOURTH RESPONDENTS DATED 27.1.2010. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. // True Copy // PS to Judge K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- W.P(C). NO. 3244 OF 2010 E --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st March, 2010 JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph, J. The prayers in the Writ Petition are as follows: “A. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents 1 to 4 to afford proper and adequate police protection to the petitioner's establishment having its shop -cum- godown at 6/12A, Achankavala, Madakkathanam P.O., Manjallur Village and godowns at 1. 8/232, Manayanil Buildings, Moovattupuzha Road, Achankavala, Madakkathanam P.O., 2. Market Road, Thodupuzha., 3. Shappumpady, Moovattupuzha road, Thodupuzha and its owners, relatives and employees and vehicles and properties from the threat of respondents 5 to 10 and their followers and henchmen for loading and unloading the raw materials and products. B. Direct respondents 1 to 4 to take proper and adequate preventive action against respondents WPC.3244/2010 E 2 5 to 10, their agents, servants, relatives and hired goondas from causing any untoward incident.” 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacturing and supplying granite. For that purpose, the petitioner has to load and unload granite, marbles, ceramic tiles, natural stone, handicrafts and furniture. There are permanent skilled employees for loading and unloading. They have submitted applications before the Assistant Labour Officer for identity cards under Rule 26A of the Headload Workers Rules, 1981. It is stated that respondents 5 to 10 are regularly threatening the petitioner and blocking the functioning of the petitioner's establishment by demanding employment. It is the petitioner's case that, to the best of the knowledge of the petitioner, respondents 5 to 10 are not members of any registered trade union and they are not registered headload workers. Hence Exts.P7 and P8 representations were given. WPC.3244/2010 E 3 3. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. Petitioner cannot carry on loading and unloading work without there being registered workers. But, the case of the petitioner is that respondents 5 to 10 are not registered workers. Therefore, they cannot obstruct and if they obstruct, the police must afford protection. But, at the same time, under the cover of protection order, the petitioner cannot claim loading and loading work unless the work is done through registered workers. It is, of course, submitted that the Scheme is not applicable to the area. Even if the Scheme is not applicable to the area, going by the Full Bench decision of this Court in Raghavan v. Superintendent of Police (1998 (2) KLT 732), no headload worker can work in the State unless he has obtained registration under the Headload Workers Act. 4. In such circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows: If there is obstruction by respondents 5 to 10, respondents 1 to 4 will afford protection to the petitioner. But, we make it WPC.3244/2010 E 4 clear that the protection will not enable the petitioner to carry on work without the held of registered headload workers under the Act. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge