IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 19TH JULY 2010 / 28TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 21044 of 2010(E) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. A.K.BADUSHA, S/O.ABDULKARIM, TC 35/1119(OLD), TC 35/477(NEW), SHAILA MANZIL, P.D.NAGAR, VALLAKADAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-8. 2. A.MAHEEN,S/O.AHAMMED KUNJU, TC 43/791, HIBA MANZIL, JUBILY NAGAR 49, KALLATTUMUKKU, MANACAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SHAHJAHAN, S/O.AZEEZ, ATTARIKATTU VEEDU, PUTHUKAD SM LOCK, POONTHURA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. NAVAS.A., S/O.ABDUL SAMAD, TC 46/779, MANIKOMVILAKOM, POONTHURA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ, S/O.JALEEL, TC 46/227, NADUVILAKOM BEEMAPALLI, VALLAKADAVU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-26. 6. BASHEER.M., S/O.MOHAMMED IBRAHIM, TC 46/377, BEEMAPALLI, VALLAKADAVU P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 7. A.MOHAMMED DASTHAKEER, S/O.AHAMMED KANNU, TC 46/876, MANIKOMVILAKOM, POONTHURA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-26. 8. M.DILSHAD, S/O.MAJEED, TC 49/131, P.R.A.44(1), PATTUVILAKAM HOUSE, KAMALEDSHWARAM, MANACAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 9. M.E.ASHRAF, S/O.MOHAMMED IBRAHIM, TC 63/544, BAITHFULFALAH, PALLYSTREET, POONTHURA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-26. Kss ..2/- ...2... WPC.NO.21044/2010 E 10. E.M.RAFI, S/O.MOHAMED ILLIAS, TC 46/765, MANIKOMVILAKOM, POONTHURA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-26. 11. D.NOUSHAD, S/O.DAVOOD KHAN, TC 46/767, CHEDIVILAKOM, MANIKOMVILAKOM, POONTHURA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-26. 12. M.RAHIM, S/O.MOHAMMED KUNJU, TC 35/864, NS DIPPO, VALLAKKADAVU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-8. 13. M.KALAM, S/O.MOIDEENKANNU, TC 35/638, PRIYADHARSHAN NAGAR, VALLAKADAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-8. 14. S.ABDUL NASAR, S/O.SUBAIR, TC 35/616(1), PRIYADHARSHAN NAGAR, VALLAKADAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-8. 15. H.ASHARAF, S/O.HUSSAIN KANNU, TC 46/344, S.A.H.MANZIL, PALLI STREET, POONTHURA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE INDUSTRIAL ENTERPRISES LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, ST.JOSEPH'S PRESS BUILDING, COTTON HILL,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE INDUSTRIAL ENTERPRISES LTD., ST.JOSEPH'S PRESS BUILDING, COTTON HILL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR, SC, K.S.I.E.LTD. SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR, SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI, SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS, SRI.P.GOPINATH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO.21044 OF 2010 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JULY, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking regularisation under the first respondent. According to the petitioners, the Company is having premises known as Trivandrum Air Cargo Complex at the International Airport, Thiruvananthapuram. The cargo that arrives at the Complex are handled by porters who are licensed by the first respondent. Such porters were engaged from 1984 onwards on temporary basis. Subsequently, when the volume of work increased, 35 more persons were engaged afresh in 1993. The petitioners are 15 among the said 35 persons. According to the petitioners, many others who were working like the petitioners have been regularised and issued with licenses. The petitioners also allege that eight persons out of the 35 were later on granted licenses by the first respondent. They claim similar treatment. 2. A detailed statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2. According to the respondents, no porter has been Wpc 21044/2010 2 regularised as contended. According to the respondents, the persons referred to by the petitioners have only been granted licenses to work as porters. The counsel contended that there is no employer-employee relationship between the first respondent and such persons who have been granted licenses. 3. Since Ext.P2 is pending consideration of the first respondent, it is better that the same is considered by the first respondent in the first instance and appropriate orders passed. Therefore, this writ petition can be disposed of with such a direction. 4. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider Ext.P2 representation submitted by the petitioners in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after giving an opportunity to the petitioners to produce additional evidence, if necessary and to be heard in the matter. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE lgk