IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH JANUARY 2011 / 22ND POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 753 of 2011(T) ----------------------- PETITIONER : -------------------- A.J.MENDONCE, BETHAL, KANATHUR,THILLERI, KANNUR-1. NOW RESIDING AT 404, DEVADAS APARTMENTS, NEAR VIJAYA CLINIC, KADERI, KUMBALA ROAD, MANGALORE-575004 BY ADV. SRI.C.K.SREEJITH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE MANAGING PARTNER, M/S.MODERN PHARMA, SUPER BAZAR COMPLEX, KANNUR-670571 2. DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER, KANNUR-670571., (AUTHORISED UNDER KERALA SHOPS AND COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENS ACT) 3. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR & REHABILITIES, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM-695001 R2 & R3 BY GOVT. PLRADER SRI. P.M. MANOJ THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 753 OF 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner was an employee of the first respondent. His service was terminated in May-June, 2006. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Kannur, the appellate authority constituted under the Kerala Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short). The said appeal was disposed of by Ext.P1 order as per which the appellate authority directed the first respondent to pay the sum of Rs.49,350/- as compensation in lieu of reinstatement in service, to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the order passed by the appellate authority, the petitioner has filed Ext.P2 petition before the Government. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the Government to consider Ext.P2 petition and pass orders thereon within a time limit to be fixed by this Court. 2. Under sub-section (5) of section 18 of the Act, the decision of the appellate authority is final and binding on both the parties. The Act does not empower the Government to revise the orders passed by the appellate authority under section 18 of the Act. In WPC No.753/2011 2 such circumstances, the relief prayed for by the petitioner cannot be granted. If the petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P1 order passed by the appellate authority, his remedy is to challenge the same by filing a writ petition in this Court. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge Ext.P1 order passed by the appellate authority constituted under the Act in other appropriate proceedings. The contentions of the petitioner on the merits are kept open. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps WPC No.753/2011 3 WPC No.753/2011 4