IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 24TH MAY 2007 / 3RD JYAISHTA 1929 WP(C).No. 15696 of 2007(R) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ C.P.CHANDREN, S/O.C.K.PURUSHOTHAMAN, RESIDING AT CHILANKA, MUKOTTIL TEMPLE ROAD, POONITHURA, KOCHI. BY ADV. SRI.A.X.VARGHESE SRI.A.V.JOJO RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD., REP. BY ITS FACTORY MANAGER, TATAPURAM P.O., ERNAKULAM, KOCHI. 2. REGIONAL JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER, KAKKANADU. SHRI.B.S.KRISHNAN. G.P. SHRI.I.V.PRAMOD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/05/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================================= W.P.(C).No.15696 of 2007 ================================== Dated this the 24th day of May, 2007 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a workman employed by the 1st respondent. He was dismissed from service in respect of which the petitioner raised an industrial dispute by filing Exts.P3 and P4 before the 2nd respondent under the Industrial Disputes Act. Petitioner's complaint is that the 2nd respondent is not taking any steps to initiate conciliation proceedings as required under the Industrial Disputes Act. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the 2nd respondent and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent. 3. When the workman approaches the 2nd respondent under the Industrial Disputes Act, it is only appropriate that the 2nd respondent initiates w.p.c.15696/07 2 conciliation proceedings expeditiously which is a statutory duty casts upon him. In the above circumstances, I direct the 2nd respondent to convene conciliation conferences pursuant to Exts.P3 and P4 as expeditiously as possible and take the dispute to its logical conclusion. Notices in this regard shall be issued to the parties latest within one month from today. Writ petition is disposed of as above. sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE