IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2011 / 20TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 21042 of 2011(E) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- M/S. SHAPOORJI PALLONJI CO. LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER (ADMINISTRATION), CONSTRUCTION SITE OF INDIAN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, VALIYAMALA, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM SMT.MERCIAMMA MATHEW SRI.K.S.HARIDAS SRI.V.RENJITH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM-695001. 2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, KERALA STATE, TRIVANDRUM-695001. 3. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, TRIVANDRUM RURAL, TRIVANDRUM-695001. 4. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NEDUMANGAD, TRIVANDRUM-695541, 5. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEDUMANGAD, TRIVANDRUM-695541. 6. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VALIYAMALA POLICE STATION NEDUMANGAD-695547, TRIVANDRUM. 7. SRI.VATTAPPARA CHANDRAN, SECRETARY, HEADLOAD AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION, INTUC, VALIYAMALA, NEDUMANGAD, TRIVANDRUM-695547. 2/- -2- WP(C)NO.21042/2011 8. SRI.KOLLAMKAVU CHANDRAN, SECRETARY, HEADLOAD AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION, CITU, VALIYAMALA, NEDUMANGAD, TRIVANDRUM-695547. 9. SRI.JYOTHISH KUMAR, PRESIDENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM JILLA GENERAL MAZDOOR SANGHAM (BMS), VALIYAMALA, NEDUMANGAD, TRIVANDRUM-695547. 10. SRI.NETHRACHIRAI JAYAN, SECRETARY, JILLA HEADLOAD WORKERS CONGRESS INTUC (1), VALIYAMALA, NEDUMANGAD, TRIVANDRUM-695547. 11. SRI.R.MANI CONVENOR, CITU, VALIYAMALA, NEDUMANGAD, TRIVANDRUM-695547. 12. SRI.D.SUNIL, CONVENOR, INTUC(1), VALIYAMALA, NEDUMANGAD, TRIVANDRUM-695547. 13. SRI.VINOD KUMAR, CONVENOR INTUC, VALIYAMALA, NEDUMANGAD, TRIVANDRUM-695547. 14. SRI.UNNI, CONVENOR, BMS, VALIYAMALA, NEDUMANGAD, TRIVANDRUM-695547. 15. SRI.SUNIL KUMAR, CONVENOR, AITUC, VALIYAMALA, NEDUMANGAD, TRIVANDRUM-695547. *ADDL.R16 IMPLEADED *R16: THE KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD * IS IMPLEADED SUO MOTU AS ADDL.R16 AS PER ORDER DATED 8/8/2011 R1 TO R6 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS R7 TO R15 BY ADV. SRI.SABU S.KALLARAMOOLA ADDL. R16 BY ADV.SRI.KOSHY GEORGE, SC, KHLWWB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.21042/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 28/11/2008 P2 COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 14/6/2010. P3 COPY OF THE FALSELY PREPARED MINUTES OF THE MEETING DATED 10/6/2011 P4 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 1/7/2011. P5 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 5/7/2011. P6 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 15/7/2011 SENT BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD TO THE PETITIONER. P7 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 20/7/2011 TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD BY THE PETITIONER. P8 COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 26/7/2011. P9 & P9(A) COPY OF THE COMPLAINTS DATED 29/7/2011 AND 30/7/2011 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE POLICE AUTHORITIES. P10 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 30/7/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.21042 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of August, 2011. J U D G M E N T C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. The petitioner is a company which has undertaken a contract for construction of the Indian Institute of Space, Science and Technology (IIST), an institute promoted by the Department of Space, Government of India. Execution of the work was started by the petitioner at Valiamala in Thiruvananthapuram District, in October 2008 and the work is in progress. It is stated that the petitioner company had entered into an agreement with respondents 7 to 15 unions settling the rate of wages payable, at the time of commencement of the work, itself. The said agreement covers the rate of wages payable with respect to construction works as well as loading and unloading works. The said agreement was in force during the year 2008-09. 2. The scheme formulated under the Kerala Head Load 2 W.P.(C) No.21042 of 2011 Workers Act has been implemented in the area in question, where the construction work is executed. The additional 16th respondent had fixed the rate of wages applicable to the loading and unloading works. It is stated that there exists a dispute with respect to payment of 27% levy, over and above the wages payable for the loading and unloading works. Through Ext.P4 the Chairperson of the Local Committee of the 16th respondent Board had issued directions to the petitioner company to make payment of levy @ 27%. The said demand was objected by the petitioner through Ext.P5 letter. Contention of the petitioner is that, the collection of levy @ 27% over and above the wages fixed, is in contravention of the Act and the Rules as well as the Scheme formulated thereunder. But the Local Committee had again informed the petitioner that, a decision has been taken in the meeting to the effect that the petitioner is liable for payment of 27% levy over and above the rate of wages payable. Aggrieved by the said 3 W.P.(C) No.21042 of 2011 decision, the petitioner company had already raised a dispute before the District Labour Officer, presumably as contemplated under Section 21 of the Kerala Head Load Workers Act. 3. Grievance voiced by the petitioner in this writ petition is that, the respondents 7 to 15 unions are now striking work and is creating obstructions to the loading and unloading works being carried out by the workers engaged by the petitioner. It is contended that the strike declared by the respondent unions is illegal and if it is allowed to be continued it will affect construction of the prestigious project of Indian Space Research Organisation. Under such circumstances, the petitioner is seeking direction to respondents 1 to 6 to afford adequate police protection for continuing with the work by engaging workers of the petitioner's choice. 4. Heard ; standing counsel appearing on behalf of additional 16th respondent Board and counsel appearing for 4 W.P.(C) No.21042 of 2011 respondents 7 to 15 unions. It is contended on behalf of the respondent unions that the demand for levy @27%, over and above the wages fixed by the Kerala Head Load Workers Welfare Board is legal and valid. However, Sri.Koshi George learned standing counsel appearing for the 16th respondent brought to our notice about a settlement arrived at the meeting of the Local Committee of the Board. It is pointed out that an agreement was arrived to maintain 'status quo' and to the effect that no obstructions will be caused to the loading-unloading activities, from the side of the trade unions. Learned counsel for the respondents 7 to 15 also informed that they are not striking the work, and they have agreed to abide by the decision which will be taken by the competent authority in settlement of the dispute. 5. We notice that, at present there is no obstruction of the work and the respondent unions as well as the additional the 16th respondent had taken a stand to continue 5 W.P.(C) No.21042 of 2011 the work subject to the result of the settlement on the dispute. The competent authority, the DLO, is in seizin of the matter. It is necessary to resolve the dispute by resorting to remedy provided under Section 21 of the Kerala Head Load Workers Act. We relegate the parties to such remedy. We expect that the DLO will take all endeavour to determine the dispute at the earliest possible. We direct the petitioner as well as the respondents 7 to 15 unions and the 16th respondent to cooperate with the said authority for determination of the dispute at the earliest. Since we have recorded that the respondents have undertaken not to disrupt the work, no specific direction for police protection is warranted at present. 6. It is made clear that in case there is any further disruption of the work in any manner, the petitioner will be at liberty to seek appropriate reliefs. However, we make it clear that if there is any threat from the side of respondents 7 to 15 trade unions or anybody claiming under them to the 6 W.P.(C) No.21042 of 2011 life and person of the Directors, staff or workers of the petitioner company, or if there is any physical obstruction caused to works carried out in the project, the respondents 1 to 6 shall take adequate and effective steps to avert such threat or obstruction and to afford protection. The writ petition is disposed of with the above observations and directions. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE ami/