IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 27TH OCTOBER 2011 / 5TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 26869 of 2011(G) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- 1. SUBHASH P., S/O BHASKARAN, AGED 47 YEARS, METER READER, KSEB, PARAPPANGADI, RESIDING AT PANAYAMKANDI (H) ARIYALLUR P.O-676312, MALAPPURAM (DT.) 2. RENJITH.P,S/O RAJAN, AGED 29 YEARS, METER READER,ELECTRICAL SECTION, RAMANATTUKARA, KOZHIKKODE,RESIDING AT PADINJAREKARIPATH (H), NALLUR, FEROKE P.O, KOZHIKKODE - 673631. 3. SARATH K.D.,S/O K.K.DHARAMARAJAN, AGED 30 YEARS, METER READER, KSEB AYYANTHLE, TCR, RESIDING AT KATTUNGAL (H), P.O POOTHOLE, S.N. PARK,TCR-680004. 4. JAIKAMAL C.R.,S/O RADHAKRISHNAN, AGED 30 YEARS,METER READER, K.S.E.B, KANDASSANKADAVU, RESIDING AT CHENNATTU(H), MANALUR P.O,TCR-680 617. 5. SINU DEVASIA, S/O DEVASIA THOMAS, AGED 30 YEARS, METER READER, KSEB, ALLEPPEY NORTH, RESIDING AT KIDAPARAMBIL (H) ASHRAMAM WARD, AVALLOOKUNNU P.O, ALAPPUZHA-688 006. 6. JIJISH N.R.S/O N.K.RAMACHANDRAN, AGED 30 YEARS, METER READER, KSEB KATTIKULAM, WAYANADU.RESIDING AT NIRAVATHUPARAMBIL (H), BAVELI P.O, MANATHAVADY, WAYANADU-670 646. 7. BINU K.Y. S/O YOHANNAN, AGED 31 YEARS, METER READER, K.S.E.B, CHELAKKARA, TCR, RESIDING AT KANNIMELPARAMBIL (H), MULLOORKARA P.O, PIN-680 583, TCR. BY ADV. SRI.C.A.JOY AV WPC.NO.26869/2011 RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY– 695 001. 2. CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM) KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 001 BY ADV.SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: AV WPC.NO.26869/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS : EXT.P1 : THE RELEVENT PARA IN THE LONG-TERM SETTELMENT. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE BOARD ORDER DATED 02.08.2000 EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE BOARD ORDER NO. B.O.(F.B) NO.641/2011 (PSI) 6047/2008 DTD. 28.02.2011 ALONG WITH THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE SETTLEMENT DATED 28.02.2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A TO JUDGE AV P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ------------------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No. 26869 of 2011 – G ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of October, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioners have approached this Court challenging Exts.P2 and P3 Board orders passed by the respondent whereby the mode of recruitment to the post of Sub Engineers (Electrical) has been varied. Many a ground has been raised in the writ petition, stating that the respondent Board is not authorised or competent to have issued Exts.P2 and P3 orders. 2. It is conceded in the writ petition that, the above orders have been issued pursuant to an industrial settlement executed between the Trade Unions and the Management. The petitioners contend that the said settlement is bad in law and not binding upon them for the reason that the concerned Trade Union is not a recognised one, according to the petitioner. 3. On going through the materials on record, it is seen that the earlier settlement executed in similar terms in between the Management and the Trade Unions provided for 60% 2 W.P.(C) No.26869/2011 quota, to be filled up by promotion from the qualified Meter Readers. By virtue of the relevant/enabling provisions, the feeder category included qualified Overseers (Electrical) also to be appointed as Sub Engineers (Electrical) under the promotion quota. Later, as per Ext.P1 settlement dated 11.8.2000, the feeder category was strictly confined to qualified Meter Readers, specifying that the post of Overseer (Electrical) shall cease to be the feeder category to the post of Sub Engineer (Electrical) from the date of settlement. 4. Pursuant to the conciliation conference held on 4.1.2010, a settlement was executed between the Management Board and the Trade Unions on 11.8.2010 to 60% promotion quota was bifurcated as 50% as 10% allotted to the qualified Meter Readers and qualified Overseers (Electrical) respectively and this led to Ext.P2 Board Order in tune thereof. Later, a new long-term settlement dated 28.2.2011 was executed and approved, whereby the quota of qualified Overseers (Electrical) was increased from 10% to 20%; simultaneously reducing the quota of Meter Readers from 50% to 40%; maintaining the total quota for promotion at 60% itself. Ext.P3 Board order was 3 W.P.(C) No.26869/2011 issued giving effect to the terms of the said settlement as above. Petitioners are stated as aggrieved of Exts.P2 and P3. 5. Going by the pleadings in the writ petition, it is quite evident that Exts.P2 and P3 Board orders has been issued by the respondents on the basis of the concerned long-term settlements entered into between Management Board and the Trade Unions. Unless and until the said settlements are set aside, the Board orders cannot be impugned. The challenge raised by the petitioners being based on the correctness of the said settlements, it is not for this Court to have it examined under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Binding nature of the Settlement is clear from S.18(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act. Whether the Settlement is correct and sustainable or not, is a matter to be adjudicated before the appropriate forum, by resorting to remedy under the I.D. Act, raising an industrial dispute and getting the same referred by the appropriate Government to be adjudicated by the Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal, as the case may be. This does not form part of the jurisdiction vested with the Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Interference is declined. The 4 W.P.(C) No.26869/2011 writ petition is dismissed. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. rka .