IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH MARCH 2010 / 19TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 3989 of 2010(W) ------------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- C.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, S/O.SUBRAMANYAN, PROPRIETOR, CHEMMUNDA TRADERS, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA. BY ADV. SRI.G.BALAMURALEEDHARAN (PARAVUR) SRI.MATHEWS V.JACOB (PARAVUR) SRI.N.T.NANDAKUMAR (PARAVUR) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR. 2. THE CHAIRMAN, HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE FUND, KOTTAPPURAM, THRISSUR. 3. INTUC, THRISSUR DISTRICT COMMITTEE, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, THRISSUR. 4. BMS, THRISSUR DISTRICT COMMITTEE, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, THRISSUR. 5. CITU, THRISSUR DISTRICT COMMITTEE, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, THRISSUR. 6. AITUC, THRISSUR DISTRICT COMMITTEE, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, THRISSUR. W.P.(C).NO.3989 OF 2010 ADDL.R7: THE CHAIRMAN, HEADLOAD WORKERS' WELFARE FUND BOARD, THRISSUR. ADDL.R8: THE ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER, KODUNGALLOOR. (ADDL.R7 AND R8 ARE SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER JUDGMENT DATED 10.03.2010.) R1 & R8 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI T.K. VIPINDAS. ADV. SRI.KOSHY GEORGE, SC, KHLWWB FOR R2 SRI.V.P.PRASAD FOR R5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C).NO.3989 OF 2010 W PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 13.01.10 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 13.01.2010 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HEADLOAD WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R5(A) SERIES PHTO COPY OF RECEIPTS. // True Copy // PS to Judge K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- W.P(C). NO. 3989 OF 2010 W --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th March, 2010 JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph, J. The Chairman, Headload Workers' Welfare Fund Board, Thrissur is suo motu impleaded as the additional seventh respondent and the Assistant Labour Officer, Kodungalloor as additional eighth respondent and the learned Government Pleader appears for the additional eighth respondent. 2. The prayer in the Writ Petition is to issue a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to afford sufficient and meaningful protection to the petitioner and his workers for doing all the loading and unloading works connected with his business throughout the Thrissur District without any threat or any sort of obstruction from the workers belonging to the various units of respondent Unions 3 to 6. 3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is as follows: Petitioner is the proprietor of a Distribution Firm engaged WPC.3989/2010 W 2 in distribution of napkins, soaps, powder, earbuds, shampoo etc. of M/s. Johnson & Johnson, Reckitt Benkicer in Thrissur District. Petitioner himself and his salesmen and drivers of the distribution van are carrying on the loading and unloading works connected with the distribution of the said items to retail shops throughout Thrissur District. They have been doing it for the last twenty years without any obstruction from workers belonging to the Unions 3 to 6. There is obstruction alleged on 13.01.2010. Petitioner files Ext.P1 complaint to the first respondent and Ext.P2 before the second respondent. 4. We heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. Learned counsel for the additional seventh respondent submits that there is no authority with the second respondent and the petitioner may have to approach the additional seventh respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner will approach the additional seventh respondent representing his grievance. Learned counsel for the fifth respondent would submit as long as the loading and WPC.3989/2010 W 3 unloading work is done in light covered delivery vehicles, they will not obstruct. We record the submission and dispose of the Writ Petition as follows: In case there is any obstruction from respondents 3 to 6 to the loading and unloading work in respect of goods carried by the petitioner in light covered delivery vehicles, the first respondent will afford protection to the petitioner as against them. It is open to the petitioner to represent the matter before the additional eighth respondent regarding his grievance. The additional eighth respondent will look into the matter under Section 21 of the Act. The present arrangement will be subject to the decision as may be taken by the statutory authorities. Petitioner will produce a copy of this Judgment before the additional eighth respondent. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // WPC.3989/2010 W 4