IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2011 / 28TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 232 of 2011(D) ---------------------- PETITIONER : -------------------- RAMANKUTTY NAIR.R., J.K.TRADERS, NOORANAD, MAVELIKARA TALUK. BY ADVS. SRI.K.SASIKUMAR SRI. JINISH PAUL RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NOORANAD-690 504. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MAVELIKARA-690 101. 3. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, ALAPPUZHA-653 001. 4. HEAD LOAD AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION (CITU), CHARUMMOODU AREA COMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY G.MANOHARAN-690 505. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. T.K VIPINDAS R4 BY ADV. SRI.P.SREEKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 232 of 2011(D) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER, MAVELIKKARA TO THE ATTACHED WORKER MR. RAJINSESH R. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER, MAVELIKKARA TO THE ATTACHED WORKER MR. ANILKUMAR R. EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER, MAVELIKKARA TO THE ATTACHED WORKER MR. MOINSH M. EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE FORM V REGISTER FOR THE PERIOD FROM 1-5-2010 TO 31-5-2010. EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE FORM V REGISTER FOR THE PERIOD FROM 1-11-2010 TO 30-11-2010. EXT.P6 : COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS - NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.232 of 2011 ***************************** Dated this the 18th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. The disputes between the parties appear to be very narrow. The petitioner is a dealer in plumbing and sanitary items etc. The work in his establishment includes loading and unloading work by head load workers. According to the petitioner, he has 3 attached workers employed by him in his premises to do the loading and unloading work. He is getting such work done within his premises with these 3 attached registered workmen whose registration cards have been produced as Exts.P1 to P3. The petitioner laments that the 4th respondent, a trade union of loading and unloading workmen, and its workmen are raising untenable objections and causing physical obstruction to such work of loading and unloading being carried on by the 3 registered (attached) workers. Police protection may be afforded for getting such work done in accordance with law, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The 4th respondent has entered appearance. The 4th respondent submits that so long as the work is done within the W.P(C) No.232 of 2011 2 premises of the petitioner and such work is got done by the 3 registered/attached workers only, the 4th respondent has no objection whatsoever. But according to the 4th respondent, that is not the way that the work is being done. The work of loading and unloading is got done even outside the premises. Such work is got done not only by the 3 registered workers, but by other persons also. The 4th respondent has objections only against loading and unloading work outside the premises being done by 3 registered/attached workers and also in the employing of persons other than the 3 registered workmen for loading and unloading work inside the establishment. 3. The learned Government Pleader after taking instructions submits that if as a matter of fact the work is done within the premises of the petitioner and such work is done by the 3 registered/attached loading and unloading workers, respondents 1 to 3 shall afford necessary protection. But no such blanket order granting protection may be given if the work is done outside the premises or such work is got done inside the premises by employing persons other than the 3 registered (attached) workers. W.P(C) No.232 of 2011 3 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner asserts that the petitioner has no intention of getting any loading and unloading work done outside the premises. It is further undertaken on behalf of the petitioner that no one other than the 3 registered/attached workers, shall be employed inside the premises also for getting any loading and unloading work done. 5. We are satisfied, in these circumstances, that the respective undertakings can be recorded. No further directions are necessary in the light of such undertakings made. 6. We record the undertaking of the petitioner that the work of loading and unloading shall be got done within the premises of the petitioner and that no one other than the 3 registered/attached workers will be employed for such work. We record the submission of the 4th respondent that the 4th respondent has no objection if the loading and unloading work is done as undertaken above by the petitioner. We record the undertaking of the learned Government Pleader that respondents 1 to 3 shall afford necessary protection if the work is carried on strictly in accordance with the terms of the undertaking by the petitioner herein. W.P(C) No.232 of 2011 4 7. No further directions are necessary. Any further dispute, if there is, will certainly have to be resolved by resort to the provisions of settlement of disputes under Section 21 of the Kerala Head Load Workers Act. This petition is allowed in part to the extent indicated above. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/