IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2008 / 2ND MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 1560 of 2008(I) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ P.G. VINCENT, SON OF K.D.GEORGE, POONJOKARAN HOUSE, P.O. RAMAVARMAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD, THRISSUR LOCAL COMMITTEE, THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EAST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. 3. P.J. CINTO, SECTION LEADER, CITU, POOL NO.11 CD, HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD, LOCAL COMMITTEE, THRISSUR. 4. N.G. VARGHESE, SECTION LEADER, INTUC, POOL NO.11 CD, HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD, LOCAL COMMITTEE, THRISSUR. 5. AJI FRANCIS, SECTION LEADER,AITUC, POOL NO.11 CD, HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD, LOCAL COMMITTEE, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.KOSHY GEORGE, SC, KHLWWB SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.M.GEORGE THOMAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC.NO.1560/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 COPY OF ORDER DTD 4..1.08 OF R1. EXT.P2 COPY OF REPRESENTATION DTD 6.1.08 EXT.P3 COPY OF INSTRUCTIONS ISSUED BY R2. EXT.R4 COPY OF REPRESENTATION DTD 7.1.08 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CHAIRMAN, KERALA HEADLOAD WORKIERS WELFARE BOARD, THRISSUR LOCAL COMMITTEE. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R4(A) COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD (DUPLICATE) DTD 23.5.05 OF THE GOVERNMENT OF KEARLA, LABAOUR DEPARTMENT NO.08.04.67/96 OF THE PETITIONER. EXTR4(B) COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD NIL PREFERRED BY RESPONDENTS 3 TO 5 BEFORE THE LABOUR OFFICER, THRISSUR. EXT.R4(C) COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.E3-273/99 DTD 22.12.07 OF THE R1 SENT TO THE UNION LEADERS REQUESTING THEM TO APPEAR FOR THE HEARING OF THEIR COMPLAINT ON 27.12.07. EXT.R4(D) COPY OF THE LETTER NO.E3/608/07 DTD 5.1.08 OF THE R1 SENT TO V.K. GOPINATHAN SECRETARY OF C.I.T.U EXT.R4(E) COPY OF THE APPEAL DTD 8.1.08 PREFERRED BY V.K. GOPINATHAN (CITU) P.P. ABRAHAM (INTUC) AND K.J. JIMMY (HMS) BEFORE THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE, KE RALA STATE HEADLOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD, ERNAKULAM EXT.R4(F) COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD NIL PREFERRED BEFORE R2 BY THE RESPONDENTS 2 AND 5 ALONG WITH OTHER UNION LEADERS. /TRUE COPY/ cl K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N. RAVINDRAN, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.1560 OF 2008-I -------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J: The petitioner is a registered headload worker under the provisions of the Kerala Headload Workers Rules. He has been granted registration under Paragraph 6 B of the Kerala Headload Workers (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Scheme. As per Ext.P1 order dated 4.1.2008, he has been attached to Pool 11 CD, which is one of the pools of the workmen, under the 1st respondent. Notwithstanding the registration, it is submitted that, he is not being allowed to work by other members of the pool. Their leaders are respondents 3 to 5. So, seeking protection to his life to do the work, he moved the police by filing Ext.P2. He was informed by the police by Ext.P3 to mark time, till the matter is decided by the Chairman of the 1st respondent Board. Feeling aggrieved by the stand of the police, this writ petition is filed seeking appropriate reliefs. 2. The learned counsel for the 1st respondent submitted that the Convener of the Pool 11 CD has been instructed to allow the WPC.NO.1560/08 . 2 petitioner to work. Respondents 3 to 5 have filed a counter affidavit. According to them, registration obtained by the petitioner under Section 26 A is not valid. Now the present order, Ext.P1, granting him registration under Paragraph 6B of the Scheme is also invalid. They have invoked the remedies available to them against those proceedings, it is submitted. We heard the learned Government Pleader for the 2nd respondent also. As long as the registrations granted to the petitioner under the Kerala Headlod Workers Rules and the one under the Scheme are remaining in force, he is entitled to do work without obstruction from any one as a member of Pool 11 CD under the 1st respondent. If anybody is causing obstruction, the petitioner may inform the 2nd respondent. In that event, the 2nd respondent shall remove the obstruction. This direction will stand recalled, if Ext.P1 is stayed or cancelled by the competent authority. It is ordered that the direction in favour of the petitioner will not fetter the power of the competent authority considering the validity of Ext.R4(a) or Ext.P1. K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. WPC.NO.1560/08 . 3 cl