IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2009 / 30TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 1856 of 2009(U) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------- SURYA SAMUDRA HOLIDAY RESORT PRIVATE LTD PULINKUDI, MULLOOR PO, CHOWARA, VIZHINJAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, SRI. REJEESH KUMAR S.V. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. TRIVANDRUM HEAD LOAD AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION (CITU) DESHABHIMANI ROAD, MELE THAMPANOOR THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -1, REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT GENERAL SECRETARY. 3. HOTEL AND RESTAURANT EMPLOYEES SENA (BKS) VADAKKENADA, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -23 REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICTSECRETARY. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT.M.R. SREELATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/01/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC : 1856/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF TERMINATION LETTER DATED 28.3.08 ISSUED BY M/S.TROILUS HOSPITALITY PRIVATE LIMITED. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 10.04.08 ISSUED TO MR.ANIKUTTAN SS, ONE OF THE EMPLOYEES OF THE PETITIONER ESTABLISHMENT ALONG WITH STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS. EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF STATEMENT DATED 17.06.08 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 2.7.08 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 : TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 06.10.08 IN WP(C) No.13501/08 EXT.P6 : TRUE COPY OF REQUEST DATED 13.01.09 FROM THE PETITIONER TO THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIZHINJAM. EXT.P7 : TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 13.01.09 FROM THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P8 : TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATIONS DATED 13.01.09 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P9 : TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATIONS DATED 15.01.09 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C).No. 1856 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT It would appear that the second and third respondent Trade Unions, representing the workers of the petitioner's establishment, raised a dispute. According to the petitioner, the dispute was raised before the 1st respondent and though several conciliation meetings have been held, the dispute is not settled and at the same time, the 1st respondent is not sending the failure report. It is with this complaint, the writ petition is filed praying the 1st respondent to close the conciliation relating to the dispute raised by respondents 2 and 3 and to send the failure report as contemplated under Section 12(4) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. 2. Learned Government Pleader on instructions submits that the conciliation was scheduled on different dates and that, only once a competent representative was no deputed by the petitioner. It is stated that, since there was effective representation on the side of the petitioner, the conciliation could not progress. 3. This submission of the learned Government Pleader was contradicted by the learned counsel for the petitioner by referring to W.P.C.No. 1856 OF 2009 -:2:- Ext.P7 and reiterating that on four occasions his authorised representative had attended the conference and on all occasions, even his participation was disturbed by the respondent Unions. 3. Though notice has been served by special messenger on respondents 2 and 3, there is no representation on their behalf. 4. Irrespective of the controversies raised by both sides, fact remains that a dispute has been raised by respondents 2 and 3 and that the said dispute is being conciliated by the 1st respondent in terms of the provisions contained in the Industrial Disputes Act. The conciliation officer can only induce the parties to settle the dispute. In this case, meetings have been held on different occasions, but, the conciliation had not ended in a settlement. If that be so, there is no purpose in delaying the matter any further and the 1st respondent has to send his report under Section 12(4), closing the conciliation. Therefore, taking into account the submission made by the learned Government Pleader that the next conciliation meeting is scheduled to 3rd February, 2009, it is directed that the petitioner will be represented by their Chief Financial Officer in whose favour W.P.C.No. 1856 OF 2009 -:3:- Ext.P2 authorisation has been given. On that day if the dispute is not settled, it is directed that the 1st respondent shall close the conciliation and send his report to the appropriate Government as contemplated under Section 12(4) of the Industrial Dispute Act without any further delay. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) ttb