High Court Kerala High Court

Jilla Chumattu Thozhilali … vs Regional Joint Labour … on 15 July, 2008

Kerala High Court
Jilla Chumattu Thozhilali … vs Regional Joint Labour … on 15 July, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 20162 of 2008(A)


1. JILLA CHUMATTU THOZHILALI CONGRESS
                      ...  Petitioner
2. S.P.SUNIL, UNIT CONVENOR, JILLA CHUMATTU

                        Vs



1. REGIONAL JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER,

3. ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICE, NEYYATTINKARA,

4. V.S.SREEKANTH, CONVENOR, CITU,

5. SREEKANTAN NAIR, DISTRICT SECRETARY,

6. U.PANKAJAKSHAN, MANDALAM PRESIDENT,

7. MURALIDHARAN, CASHEW FACTORY OWNER,

8. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,

9. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MALAYINKIL

10. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KATTAKKADA

11. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MARANALLOOR

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.R.SARIN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :15/07/2008

 O R D E R
                         S.SIRI JAGAN, J.

                  ==================

                    W.P.(C).No.20162 of 2008

                  ==================

              Dated this the 15th day of July, 2008

                         J U D G M E N T

The petitioners are a Union of headload workers and a

member of that Union working in the Azhakom Chilavakkode

area, in Thiruvananthapuram District. In respect of the area of

operation of the workers represented by the 1st petitioner, there

was a dispute between them and respondents 4 to 7. A dispute

was raised under Section 21 of the Kerala Headload Workers’ Act,

which ultimately ended in Ext.P2 order. Against the same, Ext.P3

appeal has been filed before the 1st respondent. The petitioners

seek a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders

on Ext.P3 appeal expeditiously.

2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. In

the nature of the order I propose to pass, I do not think it

necessary to issue notice respondents 4 to 7.

3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there

would be a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass

orders on Ext.P3 appeal, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate,

w.p.c.20162/08 2

within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of

this judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to

the petitioners and respondents 4 to 7.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

sdk+                                         S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE


             ///True copy///




                                  P.A. to Judge