IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2009 / 6TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 10253 of 2009(B) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- 1. REFINERY EMPLOYEES UNION, REG. NO. 7/01/2002, KOCHI REFINERIES LIMITED, AMBALAMUGAL, REP. BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, S.N. NAZEEMUDEEN. 2. P.T. JOSEPH, BADGE NO.81734, GRADE IV, MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT, BPCL-KOCHI REFINERIES LIMITED, AMBALAMUGAL-682 302. BY ADV. MR.P.RAMAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. BPCL-KOCHI REFINERY, AMBALAMUGAL, KOCHI-02, REP BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER HR. 2. SENIOR MANAGER (RECRUITMENT & PROMOTION) BPCL-KOCHI REFINERRY, AMBALAMUGAL, KOCHI-682 302. 3. C.JAYAN, BADGE NO.83877, GRADE IV, MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT, BPCL-KOCHI REFINERY, AMBALAMUGAL, KOCHI-682 302. R3 BY ADV. MR.C.S.AJITH PRAKASH, MR.T.D.SALIM, MR.PAUL C THOMAS. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR.E.K.NANDAKUMAR, SC, MR.K.JOHN MATHAI, MR.P.BENNY THOMAS, MR.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR, MR.ANIL D. NAIR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 10253/2009-B APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT IS GOVERNED BY A PROMOTION POLICY. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 24/03/2009 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 24/03/2009 FROM THE 1ST PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R3(a): COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF TRAINING ISSUED BY THE COMPANY DATED 06/10/1997. EXT.R3(b): COPY OF THE NATIONAL APPRENTICESHIP CERTIFICATE NO.K/97/5649/T. EXT.R3(c): COPY OF THE NATIONAL TRADE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR VOCATIONAL TRAINING. EXT.R1(a): COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT, (WITH A FULL TEXT OF THE PROMOTION POLICY) DATED 31/07/1973. EXT.R1(b): COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT, DATED 03/07/2008. EXT.R1(c): COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 19/12/2008. EXT.R1(d): COPY OF THE LETTER RECEIVED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL), WITH ENCLOSURE DATED 08/ 24.04.2009. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P.(C) No. 10253 of 2009 - B =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 28th day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT Heard Sri. P.Ramakrishnan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri. E.K.Nandakumar, the learned standing counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri.C.S.Ajith Prakash, the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent. 2. The second petitioner and the third respondent are workers of the first respondent company. According to the petitioners, the second petitioner entered service in the year 1987 in the Maintenance department and the third respondent entered service in the year 1996 in the Fire Safety department. Later, the third respondent came over to the Maintenance department. The dispute raised in this writ petition arises out of a long term settlement arrived at between the workers and the management evidenced by Ext.R1(a). The second petitioner claims promotion to the post of Machinist/Mechanic Craftsman in terms of the promotion policy. The petitioners' grievance is that though the second petitioner had applied pursuant to the notification dated 19-12-2008 and possessed the W.P.(C) No. 10253/09 2 qualifications prescribed therein, he was not called for the interview and that the third respondent has been called for interview and selected. 3. The pleadings disclose that even before this writ petition was filed on 30-3-2009, the first petitioner union had raised a dispute before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) by filing a petition dated 25-3- 2009. The second petitioner has through the first petitioner union already moved the competent authority under the Industrial Disputes Act seeking redressal of his grievances. Ext.R1(d) discloses that the parties were asked to be present for a discussion/conciliation at 10 A.M. on 22-5-2009. The parties are in agreement that the conciliation process has not come to an end. In such circumstances, as the petitioners have already moved the competent authority under the Industrial Disputes Act, I am of the opinion that they should pursue the said remedy, instead of seeking the intervention of this Court at this stage. I accordingly dispose of this writ petition leaving open the contentions of both sides and with a direction to the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) to expedite the conciliation proceedings and finalize the same in accordance with law within three months from today. The interim order passed by this Court while admitting the writ petition shall stand vacated. The appointment of the third respondent as W.P.(C) No. 10253/09 3 Machinist/Mechanic Craftsman, will be subject to the outcome of the resolution of the dispute by the competent authority under the Industrial Disputes Act. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. mn.