IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 21ST MAY 2009 / 31ST VAISAKHA 1931 WA.No. 979 of 2009() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.12741/2009 Dated 24/04/2009 .................... APPELLANT(S): 4TH RESPONDENT IN THE WPC --------------------------------------- V.V.P.NAIR, PRIPRIETOR, M/S. SYSTEM SECURITY SERVICES, G-3, UPPER GROUND FLOOR, EDAN GARDEN HOUSING SOCIETY, ADARSH NAGAR, AIRPORT ROAD, CHICLIM, VASCO-DA-GAMA-GOA - 403 711. BY SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.JACOB VARGHESE ADV.SRI.GEORGE MECHERIL. BY ADV. SRI.V.C.JAMES SRI.V.JAYAPRASAD RESPONDENT(S): WRIT PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN WPC ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. M.K.SURENDRAN, MUTHANIKKAT HOUSE, UDAYAMPEROOR P.O., PIN-682 307. 2. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS LPG MANAGER, KERALA STATE OFFICE, PANAMPILLY AVENUE, PANAMPILLY NAGAR P.O., COCHIN-682 036. 3. THE SENIOR PLANT MANAGER, INDANE BOTTING PLANT, INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD., NADAKKAVU, UDAYAMPEROOR P.O., COCHIN-682 307. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. SR.GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL. R1 BY ADV.SRI.ASHOK M.CHERIAN. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR FOR IOC. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/05/2009, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 7855 OF 2009 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.BANNURMATH, C.J. & KURIAN JOSEPH,J. ------------------------------------------------- W.A.No.979 of 2009, & W.P(C)Nos.7855, 12312 & 12741 of 2009 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of May, 2009 JUDGMENT Kurian Joseph,J. The issue essentially arising for consideration in these cases pertains to the engagement of additional workers for the purpose of execution of works relating to handling, cartage, clearing and miscellaneous works at the Cochin Bottling Plant of Indian Oil Corporation at Udayamperoor, as permitted by the Indian Oil Corporation. The dispute arose in the background of the implementation of the directions issued by this court in O.P.No.3094/2001. The stand taken by the workers as well as the company is that the list already in existence of evictees requiring rehabilitation should be continued whenever recruitment of casual workers is made for the purpose of the additional works, even by contractors, in view of the judgment referred to above. The grievance of the contractor is that though there is a direction for time bound execution of the work, in view W.A.No.979 of 2009 & connected cases. -:2:- of the physical inability and age factor of some of the workers in the list prepared as early as on 19-11-1996, it may not be possible for the contractor to engage workers from that list for the purpose of the strenuous work involving handling of LPG cylinders etc. 2. Having heard learned Senior Counsel appearing for the contractor, learned counsel appearing for the Company, the workers and other respondents, we find force in the submission. It is true that there was a direction to continue the list prepared in 1996. But the fact remains that the said list was never renewed. It cannot be said that for all purposes, the list should be continued for all types of requirements until it is exhausted. Now it is 13 years since the list was prepared. Many of the workers in the above list may not be physically fit to execute some of the works in view of the arduous nature of the work. There cannot be any dispute that cartage and such handling of LPG cylinders is a work involving strenuous physical labour. Therefore, as far as such W.A.No.979 of 2009 & connected cases. -:3:- works involving strenuous labour like loading, unloading and such other works involving physical lifting of LPG cylinders and any other work requiring skill and expertise, it will be open to the contractor to select those able bodied and physically fit and efficient workers as he thinks fit, from the list dated 19-11-1996 and in case such workers are not available from the list, it will be open to the contractor to engage his own workers, subject to the sanctioned number. We make it clear that as far as other works like cleaning, house-keeping etc. are concerned, workers should be engaged from the list dated 19-11-1996 till it is exhausted, subject to the willingness of such workers. If there are no willing workers in the list, it will be open to the contractor to engage his own workers. In that view of the matter we do not think that any further orders are required in the writ petitions. We set aside the interim order dated 24-4-2009 in W.P(C)No.12741/2009. We also make it clear that we have not adverted to various other contentions and the relief is limited only to the extent of the dispute as W.A.No.979 of 2009 & connected cases. -:4:- raised and covered by this judgment. The writ appeal and the writ petitions are disposed of with the above directions. S.R.BANNURMATH, Chief Justice KURIAN JOSEPH, Judge ahg. S.R.BANNURMATH, C.J. & KURIAN JOSEPH,J. --------------------------- W.A.No.979 of 2009, & W.P(C)Nos.7855, 12312 & 12741 of 2009 ---------------------------- JUDGMENT 21st May, 2009