IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 26TH AUGUST 2008 / 4TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 25577 of 2008(T) PETITIONERS: 1. THOZHILALI MULTI PURPOSE CO-OP. SOCIETY NO. 4228, NORTH PARAVOOR, ERNAKULAM – 683 513, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY SALGA T. BABY. 2. V.S. BABU, PRESIDENT, THOZHILALI MULTI PURPOSE CO-OP. SOCIETY NO. 4228, NORTH PARAVOOR, ERNAKULAM – 683 513 BY ADV. SRI.MAJNU KOMATH RESPONDENTS: 1. SUDARSANAN K.R. S/O. RAMACHANDRAN, PALAPPADAN HOUSE, KIZHAKKEPRAM, NORTH PARAVOOR. 2. K.R. PAVITHRAN, S/O. RAVUANI, KOLPPURATH HOUSE, AYYAMBILLY P.O., ERNAKULAM DIST. 3. RAMACHANDRAN, PALAPPADAN HOUSE, KIZHAKKEPRAM, NORTH PARAVOOR (DIED). 4. LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM. 5. MEENAKSHI, W/O. RAMACHANDRAN, KAVUNGAPILLY, THATHAPILLY P.O. N. PARAVOOR. 6. RANJAN K.R., KAVUNGAPPILLY HOUSE, VELLIATH PARAMBU, THATHAPILLY P.O., N. PARAVOOR. 7. KANJANA, THUNDIYIL HOUSE, GRAND LANE ROAD, ALUVA. 8. DINESHAN K.R., AMBATTU HOUSE, KARIKUNU P.O., MARIYAPADY. 9. MOLLY, EDATHATTIL HOUSE, KOOVAPADY, KONDANADU. 10. SUJATHA, PADASSERY HOUSE, EDAVANAKKADU P.O. 11. GURUPRASAD, KAVUNGAPILLY HOUSE, THATHAPILLY P.O., NORTH PARAVOOR. 12. PRADEEP KUMAR, DO. DO. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. I.V. PRAMOD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 25577 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 26th August, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioners challenge Ext. P3 order passed by the 4th respondent on 17-1-1006, wherein on a preliminary issue of maintainability of a claim petition, the Labour Court found in favour of the petitioners therein. The petitioners herein are the respondents in that claim petition. 2. I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition for more than one reason. The first is that Ext. P3 order is dated 17-1-2006, which is challenged before me on 26-8-2008. Although the petitioners would contend that the delay occurred on account of the protracted negotiations for settlement with the workmen concerned, I am not inclined to countenance such a contention. In any event, this Court and the Supreme Court have repeatedly discouraged piecemeal adjudication in industrial disputes and claim petitions before the Labour Courts and Industrial Tribunals. The remedy of the petitioners lies in challenging Ext. P3 along with the final order to be passed in the claim petition. Therefore, without prejudice to such right, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.