IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2011 / 14TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 20259 of 2011(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. VISHNUKUMAR.P.V,S/O.P.V.VIJAYAN,AGED 32 YEARS,PUTHENVELIYIL HOUSE,MARUTHORVATTOM.P.O, CHERTHALA. 2. REMYA.M.M,W/O.VISHNUKUMAR.P.V, AGED 26 YEARS,DO- DO- DO BY ADV. SRI.C.K.SAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE HOME SECRETARY,GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,MARARIKULAM, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688549. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,MARARIKULAM, PIN-688549. 4. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHERTHALA-688524. 5. AJI,S/O.NANAPPAN,KUNNUVELI, MARUTHORVATTOM.P.O,CHERTHALA-CONVENOR,LOADING AND CONSTRUCTION WORKER'S UNION (B M S),MARUTHARVATTOM UNIT,MARUTHORVATTOM.P.O,CHERTHALA-688549. 6. KANNAN,S/O.ASHOKAN KUNNUVELI, MARUTHORVATTOM.P.O,CHERTHALA-688549. 7. MAHENDRAN,S/O.KUMARAN,VELIYIL VEEDU, MARUTHORVATTOM.P.O,CHERTHALA-CONVENOR,LOADING AND CONSTRUCTION WORKERS' UNION (C I T U), MARUTHORVATTOM UNIT,MARUTHORVATTOM.P.O,CHERTHALA, PIN-688549. 8. VISWANATHAN.K @ VISWAN,S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR MATTATHIL HOUSE,MARUTHORVATTOM.P.O,CHERTHALA, LOADING AND CONSTRUCTION WORKERS' UNION(INTUC), MARUTHORVATTOM UNIT,MARUTHORVATTOM.P.O, CHERTHALA-688549. ADV. SRI.K.RAMANATHAN FOR R5-7 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPIN DAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.20259/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE NON OBJECTION CERTIFICATE ISSUED FROM THE SECRETARY (SPL.GRADE) THANNEEERMUKKOM GRAMA PANCHAYAT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE SANCTION LETTER HOUSING LOAN DATED 30/4/2011 ISSUED FROM THE STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE,CHERTHALA BRANCH. EXT.P3: COPY OF LABOUR QUOTATION DATED 15/5/2011 ISSUED FROM K.V.ANTONY (LABOUR CONTRACTOR). EXT.P4: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 17/7/2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 3D RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: EXT.R5(1): COPY OF PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS IN THE COMPOUND OF THE PETITIONERS EXT.R5(2): COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD OF THE 5TH RSPONDENT BEARING NO.04-38771 DATED 16/9/2008. EXT.R5(3): COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT BEARING NO.04-41907 DATED 6/10/2009. EXT.R5(4); COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS 5 & 6 BEFORE THE ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER, CHERTHALA. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE PLAN AND ESTIMATE CERTIFIED BY THE MUNICIPAL ENGINEER, CHERTHALA MUNICIPALITY. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE RESIDENTIAL HOUSE OF THE FATHER OF THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P8:COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE RENTED HOUSE OF THE FATHER OF THE 2ND PETITIONER. WPC NO.20259/2011 .2. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE RENT AGREEMENT DATED 25/8/2010 EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF THE FATHE OF THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P10: COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT BEARING NO.67 DATED 16/2/2011 ISSUED FROM THE THANNERMUKKOM GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.P11: COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT BEARING NO. 68 DT.16/2/2011 ISSUED FROM THE THANNERMUKKOM GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.P12: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE URINALS PROVIDED TO THE WORKERS. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No.20259 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 5th day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT Abdul Rehim, J. Petitioners are husband and wife. They are seeking police protection for construction of their residential house by engaging workers of their own choice. According to the petitioners, the construction work was started during April 2011 by availing housing loan from a commercial bank to the tune of Rs.12, 50,000/-. A Labour contractor was engaged for executing the work through Ext.P3 agreement. But respondents 5, 7 and 8, who are leaders of trade unions engaged in the field of head load workers and the 6th respondent who is a member of another union, are raising undue demands and causing all sort of obstructions to the construction activities. The petitioners allege that they are creating obstructions to the transportation of building materials and they are demanding the so called "Noku kooli" with respect to the materials brought in vehicles having self unloading devices. It is further complained that the respondents 5 to 8 are not allowing the petitioners to engage WPC.No.20259/2011 2 skilled workers through the labour contractor. It is stated that due to the threat and obstruction created, on there were discussions and the contractor had permitted to engage some of the workers belonging to respondents 5 to 8 along with the other workers. But, it was realised that they have no required expertise or skill and that they are not following the instructions given by the Supervising Engineer. More over they were not punctual in attending the work on a day today basis. Since it is found difficult to continue the work by engaging members of respondents 5 to 8, the contractor had attempted to engage workers of his own choice . But obstruction was caused by the contesting respondents. Even though the petitioners made complaint before the 2nd respondent as evidenced by Ext.P5, no effective steps were taken. Hence, this writ petition is filed. 2. In the counter affidavit filed by the 5th respondent, it is contended that the respondents 5 and 6 are skilled workers having registration with the Kerala Building and Other Construction Worker's Welfare Board. It is further stated that the respondents 5 and 6 were engaged by the petitioners for construction of the building in question. But the petitioners WPC.No.20259/2011 3 have failed to provide the required facilities and basic amenities to the employees like, drinking water facility, urinals, etc. Moreover it is complained that they were forced to work till 8.00 PM after usual working hours. It is stated that when the respondents questioned about such activities, the petitioners denied employment to them. It is also contended that there remains some arrears of wages to be paid by the petitioners to the respondents 5 and 6. It is stated that the respondents 5 and 6 have already raised complaint regarding the illegal action of the petitioners, as per Ext.R5(4) and a labour dispute is pending before the Assistant Labour Officer, Cherthala. All other allegations raised in the writ petition were refuted by the contesting respondents. 3. In a reply affidavit, the petitioners have produced copy of photographs showing the amenities provided to the workers. It is also refuted that the respondents 5,6 and 7 were engaged in the work of the building in question. The claim for arrears of wages is also denied. 4. Considering the rival contentions, we notice that even if the members of the respondents 5 to 8 are registered WPC.No.20259/2011 4 construction workers and even if it is assumed that they were engaged by the petitioners, no provision in the relevant statue provides any right upon them to claim the work of any employer on a permanent basis. Neither the Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Act nor the scheme formulated thereunder provides any employment security to the workers registered under such scheme. We do not find any right conferred on respondents 5 to 8 or their members to claim work in the construction activity under the petitioners, as a matter of right. If the respondents 5 and 8 have got any dispute regarding denial of employment or regarding non payment of wages, they can seek appropriate remedy before the Labour Authorities concerned. It is left open to respondents 5 to 8 to pursue dispute if any raised before the appropriate authorities. However, since we do not find any statutory prohibition restraining the petitioners from engaging workers of their own choice, we are of the considered opinion that respondents are not entitled to create any physical obstruction. 5. Under the above mentioned circumstances, we are inclined to direct the respondents 2 and 3 to take effective steps WPC.No.20259/2011 5 for removal of physical obstruction if any caused to the petitioners or their contractor in executing the construction work by engaging workers of their own choice. If any threat is caused in this regard, respondents 2 and 3 shall afford adequate protection. The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above directions and observations. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE dpk