IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 19013 of 2008(L)
1. C.A.ANTONY (TRICHUR) & COMPANY
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT
... Respondent
2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
3. DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER
4. CONVENOR, HEADLOAD WORKERS UNION (BMS)
For Petitioner :SRI.N.P.SETHU
For Respondent :SRI.N.NAGARESH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :17/07/2008
O R D E R
K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.
----------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.19013 OF 2008
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 17th day of July, 2008
J U D G M E N T
~~~~~~~~~~~
Balakrishnan Nair, J.
The petitioner is a dealer in vitrified tiles and other allied
materials. He claims he has his own workmen to do the loading
and unloading work in his establishment. Handling tiles is a
specialised job, which cannot be done by the unattached
headload workers of the area. While so, the members of the 4th
respondent trespassed into the petitioner’s premises demanding
“Nokkucoolie” and manhandled him and his wrokmen. Based on
the information lodged before the police about the said incident,
Ext.P1 crime has been registered against the members of the 4th
respondent, Union, for the offences under Sections 143, 147,
323, 324, 447, 341 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code. He has
also moved the District Labour Officer, Kottayam, by filing
Ex.P3 representation, pointing out the illegal actions of the
members of the 4th respondent. The petitioner further submits
the attached headload workers of the petitioner have moved the
W.P.(C) No.19013/2008 2
Assistant Labour Officer for registering them under Rule 26 A of
the Kerala Headload Workers Rules. Thereafter, this writ
petition is filed seeking necessary protection to do the loading
and unloading of tiles and other allied materials in the
petitioner’s shop using the expert employees mentioned by him
in Paragraph 7 of the writ petition.
2. The 4th respondent has filed a counter affidavit
denying the allegations of the petitioner. The said respondent
submits that the members of the 4th respondent were doing the
loading and unloading work in the petitioner’s establishment all
along. Only, very recently, they have been denied employment
and the petitioner has brought registered workmen from outside
the area. He is also engaging unregistered workmen of him. The
Union has already taken up the matter before the Labour Officer
concerned. It is also submitted that the Union have no intention,
whatsoever, to physically obstruct the petitioner or manhandle
him or his workmen. They propose to take recourse to the
remedies available to them under law.
W.P.(C) No.19013/2008 3
3. The learned Government Pleader, upon instructions,
submitted that after the incident, based on which Ext.P1 crime
has been registered, at present, there is no law and order
problem and the petitioner is doing the loading and unloading
work using workmen of his own choice.
4. We record the submission of the 4th respondent that it
has no intention to physically harm the petitioner or obstruct the
work in his establishment. If the statutory authority upholds the
right of the members of the 4th respondent to do the loading and
unloading work, the said respondent will be relieved of the above
undertaking, recorded by us.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
(K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE)
(M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE)
ps