IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 19TH JUNE 2009 / 29TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 4456 of 2009(E) ------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. P.PRABHAKARAN HEAD LOAD WORKER, KERALA STATE HAND LOOM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, KANNUR-1 2. P.MOHANAN HEAD LOAD WORKER, KERALA STATE HAND LOOM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, KANNUR-1 3. P.P.RAVEENDRAN HEAD LOAD WORKER, KERALA STATE HAND LOOM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, KANNUR-1 4. KERALA STATE HAND LOOM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LABOUR UNION, AITUC KANNUR-1 REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY C.P.SANTHOSH KUMAR. BY ADV. SMT.I.SHEELA DEVI RESPONDENTS: ---------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE HANDLOOM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, KANNUR REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN P.M.32/249,THILLERI ROAD, KANNUR-1. 2. THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER KANNUR. 3. RETURNING OFFICER FOR REFERENDUM KERALA STATE HAND LOOM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, KANNUR. R1 BY ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.ANIL D. NAIR R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT.SMITHA SUKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. 4456 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioners' grievance in this writ petition is that in the referendum proposed to be held on 19.02.09 by the 1st respondent, petitioners 1 to 3 who claim to be the members of the 4th petitioner union are not being permitted to vote. Petitioners therefore seek the following reliefs: “i. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondents to keep a separate ballot box and permit them to cast vote in the ensuing referendum scheduled to be held on 19.02.09; ii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondents to include the petitioners 1 to 3 in the voter's list and consider and pass orders on Ext.P13 and P13(a) at the earliest as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to fix;” 2. In the writ petition on 16.02.09, I passed the following interim order: “ Despite notice has been served by special messenger, none appears for the 3rd respondent. After hearing the petitioner, I am inclined to pass an interim order. Accordingly, there would be an interim order to the 3rd respondent to permit petitioners 1 to 3 to WPC :4456/09 -:2:- cast vote in the referendum to be scheduled on 19.02.09 for which purpose a separate ballet box shall be provided.” When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel for the 1st respondent submitted that only three unions participated in the referendum and all the three unions have been granted recognition. That being so, the votes of the petitioners 1 to 3 cannot affect the referendum and there is no point in considering the writ petition on merits. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed leaving open the contentions of the petitioners to be agitated again if occasion arises. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ttb