IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL THURSDAY, THE 8TH DECEMBER 2011 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 31785 of 2011(W) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- SAJAN T.A., S/O ANTONY, AGED 40 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, SIMONA TRADING AND CONTRACTING DOOR NO. 12/188 C, KOOVAPADAM, COCHIN- 02. BY ADV. SRI.BIJU ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR, MATTANCHERY- 682 002. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE SUB INSPECTOR, MATTANCHERY- 682 002. 3. THE THURAMUGHA THOZHILALI UNION(C.T.T.U) PANAYAPPALLY, MATTANCHERY- 682 002. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SHIHABUDHEEN AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS. 4. HEAD LOAD WORKERS UNION (C.I.T.U) THOPPUMPADY- 682 005, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. ABDUL RAHMAN, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS. * ADDL.R5 IMPLEADED * THE DISTRICT EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA STATE HEAD LOAD WORKERS BOARD,ERNAKULAM * ADDL. R5 IS IMPLEADED SUO MOTO AS ORDERD ON 29/11/11) R1 & R2 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.K.ABOOBACKER R3 & R4 BY ADV.SRI.B.N.SHIVSANKAR ADDL.R5 BY ADV. SRI.KOSHY GEORGE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.31785/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXT.P1:- A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 16/11/2011 MADE BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENTS. EXT.P2:- A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD 17/11/2011 IN RESPECT OF THE COMPLAINT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : R4(A) THE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE UNDERSTANDING ARRIVED IN BETWEEN MY UNION AND THE PETITIONER. R4(B) THE COPY OF THE WORK CARD. /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO.JUDGE sts PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K. HARILAL,JJ. .................................................................... W.P.(C).NO.31785 OF 2011 ................................................................... Dated this the 8th day of December, 2011. JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J. The petitioner, who is the proprietor of Simona Trading and Contracting, has approached this Court complaining that on account of the inter union rivalry between the members of respondents 3 and 4 trade unions, the petitioner is not in a position to carry on operations in his business. 2. On considering this writ petition for admission, this Court suo motu impleaded the District Executive Officer, Kerala State Headload Workers Board, Ernakulam as the additional 5th respondent. Sri. Koshy George-learned standing counsel submitted before us that the area in question where the functional operation of the Headload Workers Scheme has been implemented. The workers included in two pools (BM-A and BM-B) are alloted to the petitioner's unit. To the knowledge of additional 5th respondent there is no rivalry between respondents 3 and 4. At any rate, the petitioner does not have any registered workers of his own and the petitioner is bound to engage W.P.(C).NO.31785 OF 2011 : 2 : the workers who are alloted from the concerned pools. It was submitted by Sri. K.R. Vinod - the learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent that it is members of the 4th respondent union who are alloted to the pools concerned. Under the above circumstances, we are of the view that so long as the petitioner is bound to engage the workers who are alloted to pool BM-A and BM-B by the local committee under the additional 5th respondent, if any outsider is creating any trouble to the conduct of the work by the workers who are allotted to the two pools, it is open to the petitioner to seek assistance of the 2nd respondent. However, we make it clear that the petitioner will be bound to engage the workers who are alloted from the pools. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. K. HARILAL, JUDGE. cl