High Court Kerala High Court

Drugs & Pharmaceuticals … vs Kerala State Drugs And … on 24 September, 2007

Kerala High Court
Drugs & Pharmaceuticals … vs Kerala State Drugs And … on 24 September, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 10434 of 2007(P)


1. DRUGS & PHARMACEUTICALS EMPLOYEES
                      ...  Petitioner
2. KERALA STATE DRUGS AND PHARMACEUTICALS

                        Vs



1. KERALA STATE DRUGS AND PHARMACEUTICALS
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.V.BABY

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON,SC,KSDP LTD.

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :24/09/2007

 O R D E R
                          S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
                     ------------------------------
                    W.P.(C)No.10434 OF 2007
                   ---------------------------------
             Dated this the 24th day of September, 2007

                             JUDGMENT

The learned counsel for the additional 3rd respondent raises

an objection to the continuance of stay on the ground that the

writ petition itself is not maintainable. The contention is that the

1st respondent Company is not amenable to writjudication of this

court in respect of such matters since there is no violation of any

of the fundamental rights of the petitioners. Admittedly, the

Company is going through a severe financial crisis as a result of

which the Company is not able to pay even the salary of the

employees of the Company. That being so, it defies logic as to

why the Company should take a hasty decision to give pay parity

benefits to a set of workers that too without concurrence from

the Government, which owns the Company. That being so, I am

satisfied that the writ petition is maintainable. However, the

learned counsel for the 3rd respondent submits that it is more

appropriate that the Government decides the mater. I feel that

W.P.(c)No.10434/07 2

the said submission is justified. Therefore, I dispose of this

writ petition with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider

the matter in respect of which Ext.P3 is pending and pass

appropriate orders thereon as expeditiously as possible, at any

rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of

this judgment after affording an opportunity of being heard to

all parties concerned, including the petitioners and the 3rd

respondent. Till the Government takes a decision thereon the

present position shall continue.

S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

Acd

W.P.(c)No.10434/07 3