IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2011 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 27761 of 2011(U) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- DHILIP PATEL, MANAGING PARTNER, DEERA DISTRIBUTORS, 4/1487 CUSTOM ROAD, CALICUT 673 032 BY ADVS. SRI.PULIKKOOL ABUBACKER SMT.P.A.ANEESHA RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VELLAYI POLICE STATION, CALICUT PIN 67032 2. CHIEF EXECUTIVE, KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD, SRM ROAD,COCHIN-18 3. SECRETARY CITU, GANDHI ROAD SECTION, KOZHIKODE 673 032 4. SECRETARY,INTUC VELLAYI SECTION,KOZHIKODE 673 032 R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.M.K.ABOOBACKER R2 BY ADV. SRI.KOSHY GEORGE R3 & R4 BY ADV. SRI. R. SUDHISH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO.27761/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD P1(a):COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD P1(b):COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD P2: COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 08/10/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.27761 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of October, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Abdul Rehim, J. The petitioner is the Managing Partner of a firm engaged in distribution of various goods in Delivery Vans and other vehicles. According to the petitioner, he has got 3 permanent workers who have got registration under Rule 26A of the Kerala Headload Workers Rules, for doing the loading unloading works in the godown of the petitioner's firm. Grievance of the petitioner is that, members belonging to respondents 3 and 4 unions are causing constant obstructions to the loading- unloading works being done through the permanent workers having registration. Eventhough the petitioner submitted Ext.P2 complaint before the 1st respondent, no effective steps have been taken to remove such obstructions or to afford protection. Hence this writ petition is filed seeking appropriate directions. 2. Respondents 3 and 4 entered appearance through Adv.R.Sudhish. It is contended that the permanent workers attached to the petitioner who have got registration under Ext.P1 series are entitled to do works of the petitioner only at their godown at Kottayam plantation compound and that they W.P.(C).27761/11 -2- are not entitled to do any works of the petitioner in any other premises. It was also contended that the members of respondents 3 and 4 unions are registered workers engaged in loading-unloading work in the area where the godown is situated. It is further contended that the order of police protection if any granted will effect their right to work for other employers in the area in question as well as inside the Kottanadu plantation compound. We do not agree with the contention that the permanent workers of the petitioner are not entitled to do the loading-unloading works of the petitioner in other premises. It is pertinent to note that through Ext.P1 series the workers are given registration as permanent workers attached to the establishment, which is the firm of the petitioner namely Deera Distributors. Therefore we do not find any impediment in the permanent workers doing work of the petitioner at different places. However we make it clear that engagement of permanent workers by the petitioner will not in any manner affect the rights if any to the members of respondents 3 and 4 union, in doing the loading-unloading works within the very same compound with respect to other establishments. It is further contended that if the petitioner has got any extra work to be done, he has to engage workers from the pool constituted under the welfare scheme of 1983, which is brought into functional operation in the area in question. W.P.(C).27761/11 -3- 3. Considering the above contentions, we are of the opinion that the petitioner has got every right to engage his own permanent workers for doing the loading-unloading works. Respondents 3 and 4 unions or anybody claiming under them have no manner of right to obstruct such works. 4. Therefore we dispose of this writ petition directing the 1st respondent to take effective steps, in case any intimation is received regarding obstructions caused by respondents 3 and 4 or anybody claiming under them with respect to the loading- unloading works of petitioner's firm which is being carried out by engaging their permanent workers who are having registration under Rule 26A. 5. However, we make it clear that apart from the permanent registered workers if the petitioner requires to engage any other persons for extra work, he has to engage workers having registration under the welfare scheme which is already implemented in the area in question. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb