{"id":121848,"date":"2010-05-31T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-05-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010"},"modified":"2016-01-18T07:30:55","modified_gmt":"2016-01-18T02:00:55","slug":"g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010","title":{"rendered":"G.O. Joy vs The Kerala Headload Workers … on 31 May, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
G.O. Joy vs The Kerala Headload Workers … on 31 May, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 16089 of 2005(M)\n\n\n1. G.O. JOY,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE KERALA HEADLOAD WORKERS WELFARE\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE KERALA HEADLOAD WORKERS WELFARE\n\n3. STATE OF KERALA,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.BABU KARUKAPPADATH, SC,KHLWWB\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN\n\n Dated :31\/05\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                       S. SIRI JAGAN, J.\n                  ------------------------------\n                  W.P.(C) No.16089 OF 2005\n                  -------------------------------\n             Dated this the 31st day of MAY, 2010\n\n\n                        J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
      The petitioner claims to be the headload worker registered<\/p>\n
under Rule 26A of the Kerala Headload Workers Rules as<\/p>\n
evidenced by Ext.P1 identity card.    According to the petitioner,<\/p>\n
the petitioner was working in the place of his father-in-law who<\/p>\n
was, on account of indifferent health, not working and was due to<\/p>\n
retire on superannuation on 31.5.2005.       The petitioner would<\/p>\n
contend that under clause 6B of the Kerala Headload Workers<\/p>\n
(Regulation of Employment Welfare) Scheme 1983, the 2nd<\/p>\n
respondent is bound to assess the probable number of workers<\/p>\n
that may be required additionally on account of retirement on<\/p>\n
superannuation, death, disability, resignation, removal and<\/p>\n
expansion of the Scheme and resolve to register such number of<\/p>\n
additional workers in the committee after complying with the<\/p>\n
procedure contemplated in sub rule (2) of clause 6B.          The<\/p>\n
petitioner complains that the second respondent is not taking<\/p>\n
W.P.(c)No.16089\/05                     2<\/span><\/p>\n
appropriate steps to comply with the said procedure.               The<\/p>\n
petitioner, therefore seeks the following reliefs:<\/p>\n
            “a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other
\n            appropriate writ or order quashing and setting
\n            aside Exhibits p-3,\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             b)     A writ of mandamus, or any other writ,
\n            order or direction, directing the 2nd respondent to
\n            fill up the vacancies in Pool 26A of Thrissur Local
\n            Committee,\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             d)     A writ of mandamus, or any other writ,
\n            order or direction, directing the 2nd respondent to
\n            consider the petitioner to the existing vacancy and
\n            permit him to continue till the vacancies are filled,\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             e)     Declare that Clause 6B(2) of the Kerala
\n            Headload Workers (Regulation of Employment and
\n            Welfare)Scheme, 1983 to the extent it stipulates
\n            that a registered worker working in that area alone
\n            can be considered for replenishment is arbitrary,
\n            illegal and unconstitutional and…”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that<\/p>\n
the petitioner does not now press prayer (e) of the writ<\/p>\n
petition and would be satisfied, if the second respondent takes<\/p>\n
appropriate steps to fill up vacancies as contemplated under<\/p>\n
clause 6B of the Scheme.\n<\/p>\n
      2.    A counter affidavit has been filed by the second<\/p>\n
respondent, in which the contentions of the petitioner has been<\/p>\n
controverted specifically in paragraphs 3, 4 and 6 which read<\/p>\n
thus:\n<\/p>\n
W.P.(c)No.16089\/05                      3<\/span><\/p>\n
             “3.    The claim of the petitioner that he
\n             commenced the service as Headload worker
\n             under Pool No.24A of Thrissur Local Committee
\n             in the year 2000 is totally incorrect and
\n             baseless.    It is submitted that the petitioner
\n             has never work under Pool No.24A or under
\n             any    other    pool    under    Thrissur   Local
\n             Committee,     Thrissur.       It is   true   that
\n             Sri.K.A.Devassy    is   a   registered  Headload
\n             worker with Reg.No.24A\/6 under the Thrissur
\n             Local Committee. However the contention that
\n             the petitioner was inducted in the place of
\n             Sri.K.A.Devassy     is   totally  incorrect   and
\n             baseless.   There is no provision or procedure
\n             for inducting any other person in the place of a
\n             registered Headload worker.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             4.     It  is  also    incorrect   to  say    that
\n             Sri.K.A.Devassy has become unwell. Such an
\n             information   was     never   conveyed    to   the
\n             respondents.       Moreover from the records
\n             available with the 2nd respondent it is clear
\n             that   Sri.K.A.Devassy     has   been    regularly
\n             attending the work till 31.5.2005 and he has
\n             been receiving salary regularly.    True copy of
\n             the attendance register in respect of Pool
\n             No.24A & B under Thrissur Local Committee for
\n             the period from January 2005 to May 2005 is
\n             produced herewith and marked as Exhibit-R1\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             (a).   A true copy of the acquaintance roll
\n             relating to pool No.A & B under Thrissur Local
\n             Committee for the period from January 2005 to
\n             May 2005 is produced herewith and marked as
\n             Exhibit-R1(b).    It is clear from Ext.R1(a)& R1\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             (b) that Sri.K.Devassy has been regularly
\n             attending the work as Headload worker and
\n             receiving wages for the same.        It is further
\n             clear from those documents that the petitioner
\n             has never attended loading and unloading work
\n             or received wages from the Kerala Headload
\n             Workers Welfare Board.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             5.     xxxx         xxxxx         xxxxx\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             6.     So also the further contention of the
\n             petitioner that there are a number of vacancies
\n             of Headload workers under the 2nd respondent<\/p>\n
W.P.(c)No.16089\/05                        4<\/span><\/p>\n
             and the respondents are not filling up the same
\n             under clause 6B(1) of the Kerala Headload
\n             Workers     (Regulation      of   Employment     and
\n             Welfare) Scheme 1983 is totally incorrect and
\n             misleading.        There is no specific notified
\n             vacancies in the pool as sought to be projected
\n             by the petitioner.        It is submitted that the
\n             pools were formed, when the scheme was
\n             implemented in the area, registering all the
\n             then Headload workers under clause 6A of the
\n             scheme.           However there were drastic
\n             reduction in loading and unloading work in the
\n             area.    So though some of the workers were
\n             removed from the roll on superannuation,
\n             death etc. the committee has not found it
\n             necessary to engage new workers. As already
\n             submitted it is only because of the reduction in
\n             work in the area and not because of the
\n             pressure of the regular workers as contented
\n             by the petitioner in the W.P.       It is respectfully
\n             submitted that under Clause 6B of the scheme,
\n             the committee need assess the probable
\n             number of workers required additionally in the
\n             locality only if it is satisfied that more numbers
\n             of workers      are necessary.           As  already
\n             submitted the committee has not taken such a
\n             decision only because it is satisfied that the
\n             Headload     work      in   the   area    has   been
\n             considerably reduced because of the reduction
\n             in business in the area.           It is respectfully
\n             submitted that Ext.P2 representation has been
\n             answered through Ext.P3.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      3.    I have considered the rival contentions in detail.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
The question as to whether there is enough work available<\/p>\n
despite superannuation, death, disability, resignation etc. of<\/p>\n
existing workers is a pure question of fact.                      The second<\/p>\n
W.P.(c)No.16089\/05               5<\/span><\/p>\n
respondent has specifically stated in the counter affidavit that<\/p>\n
there was drastic reduction in loading and unloading work in<\/p>\n
the area. The petitioner has no case that overlooking any valid<\/p>\n
claim of the petitioner for registration under clause 6B of the<\/p>\n
Scheme, any other headload worker has been included by the<\/p>\n
second respondent in the pool.    That being so, the remedy of<\/p>\n
the petitioner lies in applying for registration as headload<\/p>\n
worker under clause 6B of the Scheme as and when the second<\/p>\n
respondent publishes notification inviting applications for the<\/p>\n
same.      Therefore, without prejudice to that right, this writ<\/p>\n
petition is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                  S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE<\/p>\n
acd<\/p>\n
W.P.(c)No.16089\/05    6<\/span><\/p>\n
W.P.(c)No.16089\/05    7<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court G.O. Joy vs The Kerala Headload Workers … on 31 May, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 16089 of 2005(M) 1. G.O. JOY, … Petitioner Vs 1. THE KERALA HEADLOAD WORKERS WELFARE … Respondent 2. THE KERALA HEADLOAD WORKERS WELFARE 3. STATE OF KERALA, For Petitioner :SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN For […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-121848","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nG.O. Joy vs The Kerala Headload Workers ... on 31 May, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"G.O. Joy vs The Kerala Headload Workers ... on 31 May, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-05-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-01-18T02:00:55+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"G.O. Joy vs The Kerala Headload Workers … on 31 May, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-05-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-18T02:00:55+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1085,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010\",\"name\":\"G.O. Joy vs The Kerala Headload Workers ... on 31 May, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-05-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-18T02:00:55+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"G.O. Joy vs The Kerala Headload Workers … on 31 May, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"G.O. Joy vs The Kerala Headload Workers ... on 31 May, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"G.O. Joy vs The Kerala Headload Workers ... on 31 May, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-05-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-01-18T02:00:55+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"G.O. Joy vs The Kerala Headload Workers … on 31 May, 2010","datePublished":"2010-05-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-18T02:00:55+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010"},"wordCount":1085,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010","name":"G.O. Joy vs The Kerala Headload Workers ... on 31 May, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-05-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-18T02:00:55+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/g-o-joy-vs-the-kerala-headload-workers-on-31-may-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"G.O. Joy vs The Kerala Headload Workers … on 31 May, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/121848","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=121848"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/121848\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=121848"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=121848"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=121848"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}