High Court Kerala High Court

A.M.Hamsa vs State Of Kerala on 15 June, 2007

Kerala High Court
A.M.Hamsa vs State Of Kerala on 15 June, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 12170 of 2007(W)


1. A.M.HAMSA, JINAS MANZIL, CHADAYAMANGALAM
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE GENERAL SECRETARY, QUILON DISTRICT

3. ANIE GEORGE, PROPRIETRIX, ROBIN MOTORS,

                For Petitioner  :DR.K.P.SATHEESAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :15/06/2007

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

                     -----------------------------------

                       W.P.(C)NO. 12170 OF 2007

                           -------------------------

             DATED THIS THE 15th DAY OF JUNE, 2007


                                   JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the second additional management in

I.D.No.25/2003 before the Labour Court. In that I.D., the Labour

Court passed Ext.P3 ex parte award, since the petitioner management

did not appear before the Labour Court. The petitioner filed an

application to set aside the ex parte award. It appears that the same

has been allowed on condition that the petitioner pays an amount of

Rs.1,500/- as costs to each of the workers involved within thirty days.

That order has neither been produced nor challenged before me.

Thereafter the Labour Court passed Ext.P4 order dismissing the

petition for setting aside the ex parte award on the ground that cost as

ordered has not been paid. The award and the order dismissing the

petition to set aside ex parte order for non-payment of costs are

under challenge before me. Since the petitioner has not paid the cost,

which was a condition for setting aside the ex parte award, I am not

inclined to interfere with Ext.P4 order. As far as the award is

concerned, on going through the same, I find that the issue referred

W.P.(c)No.12170/07 2

was denial of employment to the workers mentioned in the award

and the issue was decided on the basis of evidence available on

record. The reading of the award does not disclose any perversity,

whatsoever in the findings of fact entered by the Labour Court.

In the above circumstances, I do not find any merit in the writ

petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed.

S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

Acd

W.P.(c)No.12170/07 3