IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 27TH JUNE 2008 / 6TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 18668 of 2008(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ 1. KERALA STATE COIRFED EMPLOYEES CONGRESS, (INTUC), COIRFED, ALAPPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT A.A.SHUKKUR,(KURUMPELLIL HOUSE, SEA VIEW WARD, A,APPUZHA). 2. R.MOHANDAS, UPPER DIVISION CLERK, COIRFED, ALAPPUZHA(VALIYAVEETTIL, ALAPPAD, KARUNAGAPPALLY) BY ADV. SRI.K.KARTHIKEYA PANICKER SMT.DAYA K. PANICKER RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE COIR MARKERTING FEDERATION LTD., ALAPPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, COIRFED, ALAPPUZHA. 2. THE REGIONAL JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN, SC, COIRFED FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.801/98 DTD.16.3.2004 ISSUED BY THIS COURT. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD.27.10.2006 IN W.P.9C)NO.25134/2006 ISSUED BY THIS COURT. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.21.12.2006 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WA 444/2008 DTD. 22.2.2008 ISSUED BY THIS COURT. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DTD.13.3.2008 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.G-701/08 DTD.16.5.2008 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. TRUE COPY P.A.TO JUDGE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ====================================== W.P.(C) NO. 18668 OF 2008 ====================================== Dated this the 27th day of June 2008 JUDGMENT The second petitioner is an employee of the first respondent. The first petitioner is a trade union of such employees. By Ext.P4, arising from a writ petition filed challenging the decision of the Managing Director of the first respondent regarding the benefits under Rule 189(3) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, this Court relegated the petitioners to invoke statutory remedies available under the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act and Rules. Instead of doing that, the petitioners went to the Joint Labour Commissioner and submitted Ext.P5. That authority took the view that the petitioners have to agitate their claim before the Labour Court under Section 33-c(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. This writ petition is filed seeking judicial review of that decision of the Regional Joint Labour Commissioner. For one thing, if the petitioners wanted to pursue their remedies following Ext.P4 judgment, they could have gone to the authorities under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. The W.P.(C)18668/2008 2 Joint Labour Commissioner has apparently taken the view that the petitioners have to move under Section 33-c(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act on the assumption that they are claiming statutory reliefs referable to Rule 189(3) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules. Even that way, it is not for this Court to express on the maintainability of a proceeding that may be instituted before the Labour Court invoking Section 33-c(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. Either way, the impugned order does not warrant any interference at the hands of this Court though this Court is also not confirming that the order on merits by the dismissal of this writ petition. In the result, this writ petition is dismissed leaving open all questions including the right of the petitioners to move under the Industrial Disputes Act or under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, as the case may be. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE css/