IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 28TH MAGHA 1932 OP(LC).No. 879 of 2010(O) ------------------------------------- [ID.NO.11/2007 OF LABOUR COURT, KOZHIKODE DTD.03/02/2010] .................... PETITIONER/UNION:- ----------------------------- THE SECRETARY, KOZHIKODE TALUK COMMERCIAL EMPLOYEES UNION (CITU) PALAYAM ROAD, KOZHIKODE. BY ADVS. SRI.JACOB ABRAHAM, SMT.KOCHUMOL KODUVATH. RESPONDENTS/MANAGEMENTS: ------------------------------------------------ 1. THE LABOUR COURT, KOZHIKODE – 673 001. 2. THE MANAGER, CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION, L.P.G.GAS OUTLET (BHARAT GAS), S.K.TEMPLE ROAD, 673 001, KOZHIKODE. 3. K.N.SWAROOP KUMAR, DELIVERY CONTRACTOR, L.P.G.GAS OUTLET (BHARAT GAS), S.K.TEMPLE ROAD, KOZHIKODE- 673 001. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.M. MANOJ. THIS OP (LABOUR COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/02/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J ........................................... O.P(LC)No. 879 OF 2010 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2011 JUDGMENT Ext.P3 award passed by the Labour Court, Kozhikode in I.D.No.11 of 2007 is under challenge in this writ petition. The dispute referred for adjudication by the Labour Court was whether the denial of employment to Sri.P.K.Suresh, Delivery Boy, by the management of the LPG Gas Outlet run by the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation at Puthiyara, Kozhikode is justifiable ? The Labour Court, on analysis of the evidence oral and documentary available in the case held that the Delivery Boy was not an employee of the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation. It was held that in the absence of any employer- employee relationship between the second respondent or the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation and the worker, no relief can be granted to the worker. 2. I heard Sri Jacob Abraham, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. I have also gone through the pleadings and the materials on record. The Labour Court, on the evidence available before it, including the admission made by the worker himself OPLC 879/2010 2 that neither the second respondent nor the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation had paid him wages, held that there is no employer- employee relationship between the worker and the second respondent herein. The said finding is a finding of fact based on the evidence on record and cannot be said to be perverse. It has also come out in evidence that the worker was engaged by the third respondent herein, the delivery contractor who had undertaken the work of supplying LPG Cylinders to consumers of the second respondent. The second respondent is none other than the Manager of the Kerala Civil Supplies Corporation which is a distributor of liquified petroleum gas at Kozhikode. In the absence of any material to prove the employer-employee relationship between the worker and the second respondent herein, the finding of fact arrived at by the Labour Court cannot be said to be perverse. I therefore find no grounds to entertain the writ petition. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE lgk