IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 15TH JANUARY 2008 / 25TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 38005 of 2007(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ P.R. BAIJU, PALAKKARIKATHU VEEDU, CHERUKADAVU, CHALIAKKARA P.O., PIRAVANTHOOR. BY ADV. SMT.VIVEEJA RAVEENDRAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY HOME SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATHANAPURAM POLICE STATION. 3. KERALA STATE FOREST WORKERS (HEADLOAD AND GENERAL WORKERS) UNION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, K.KRISHNAN, KARAVOOR, PATHANAPURAM. 4. HEADLOAD WORKERS UNION, CHEMPANARUVI AREA, REPRESENTED BY M.G.VARGHESE, CHEMPANARUVI, PATHANAPURAM. 5. CASUAL LABOURERS UNION, MULLUMALA ESTATE, REPRESENTED BY P.MOHANAN, MULLUMALA, PATHANAPURAM. 6. ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER, PUNALUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN SRI.T.C.KRISHNA SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI GOVT. PLEADER SRI.SALIM P.A. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC 38005/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS. EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE CONFIRMATION LETTER DATED 26.7.2007 IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE STATE FARMING CORPORATION OF KERALA LIMITED. EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.SFCK/SALES/2007-2008 DATED 14.8.2007 ISSUED BY THE STATE FARMING CORPORATION OF KERALA LIMITED. EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 22.9.2007 TO THE 6TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 15.12.2007 TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXTS. EXT.R3 (a) – TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CARD ISSUED UNDER RULE 26(A) OF THE KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS RULES. EXT.R3(b)- TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 10.8.07 BETWEEN PETITIONER AND VARIOUS TRADE UNIONS. EXT.R5(a) – TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED BY KERALA STATE FARMING CORPORATION. EXT.R5(b) – TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G722/91 DATED 8.5.1991 ISSUED BY REGIONAL JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER, KOLLAM. /TRUE COPY/ K.Balakrishnan Nair & P.N.Ravindran, JJ. ========================== W.P(C).No.38005 of 2007 ======================== Dated this the 3rd day of January, 2008. ORDER Balakrishnan Nair,J. The petitioner is a contractor, who was given the right to cut and remove 675 cashew trees by the State Farming Corporation from its estate at Mullumala. When he tried to cut and remove the trees, workmen represented by respondents 3 to 5 obstructed. He moved the police for protection. Since no help was forthcoming, this Writ Petition is filed seeking appropriate reliefs. Respondents 3 and 4 represent the workmen who are headload workers in that area, it is submitted. 2. The third respondent submits that the said union represents the registered headload workers in that area. According to the third respondent, the fourth respondent represents the headload workers in the adjoining area. The fifth respondent represents the casual workers of the State Farming Corporation. The local headload workers claim that they are WP(C) 38005/07 -: 2 :- entitled to do the loading and unloading work and they were doing the same in the past also. The fifth respondent seriously disputes that claim. According to them, their claim to do the loading and unloading work has been established by a decision of the Regional Joint Labour Commissioner under the Headload Workers Act. 3. It is common case that the dispute has been raised before the sixth respondent - Assistant Labour Officer. We feel that the police cannot decide who among the workers are eligible to do the loading and unloading work and it is to be done by the Officers of the Labour Department. The matter is still pending before the Assistant Labour Officer. The petitioner and the representatives of respondents 3 and 4 shall appear before the sixth respondent on 7.1.2008 by 11 a.m. along with a copy of this order and the said officer shall hear the rival claims and decide who are the workmen eligible to do the loading and unloading work and therefore, to be engaged by the petitioner. If anybody causes obstruction to the work done by such eligible workmen, the police shall remove the obstruction. The decision of the Assistant Labour Officer is only for the limited purpose of WP(C) 38005/07 -: 3 :- granting police protection decision. If anybody is aggrieved by the said decision, he will be free to challenge it. If the dispute has been referred by the sixth respondent to the District Labour Officer, Kollam and the parties shall appear before the District Labour Officer and the said Officer will take a decision. The petitioner shall inform about the conference scheduled to be held on 7.1.2008 to the concerned workmen of the State Farming Corporation, so that the officers of the Corporation, who want to participate can also participate in the conference. Post after one week. K.Balakrishnan Nair, Judge. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess 3/1