{"id":257867,"date":"2009-07-24T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-07-23T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2"},"modified":"2014-07-20T08:41:53","modified_gmt":"2014-07-20T03:11:53","slug":"cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2","title":{"rendered":"Cochin Refinery Workers … vs Union Of India on 24 July, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Cochin Refinery Workers … vs Union Of India on 24 July, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 20246 of 2009(A)\n\n\n1. COCHIN REFINERY WORKERS ASSOCIATION,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n2. REFINERY EMPLOYEES UNION, REG.NO.\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE REGIONAL JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER\n\n3. BPCL-KOCHI REFINERY, AMBALAMUGAL,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI\n\n Dated :24\/07\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                        V.GIRI, J.\n           ----------------------------------------\n               W.P.(C).No<\/a>.19067, 20246,\n                    & 20854 of 2009\n           ----------------------------------------\n         Dated this the 24th day of July, 2009.\n\n                       JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
         Common issues arise for consideration in these<\/p>\n
cases. Therefore, they have been heard together and<\/p>\n
are being disposed of by this common judgment.<\/p>\n
         2.   Since there is a separate contention in<\/p>\n
relation to the locus standi of the petitioner in W.P.(C)<\/p>\n
No.19067\/09, I will deal with W.P.(C).No.20246\/09, as<\/p>\n
the leading case.\n<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).No.20246\/09<\/p>\n
         3. The petitioners are registered trade unions<\/p>\n
representing workers of Cochin Refineries in various<\/p>\n
departments, including fire and safety. On 27.11.2006<\/p>\n
Ext.P1, a tripartite conciliation settlement was entered<\/p>\n
into between Kochi Refineries and two trade unions,<\/p>\n
then in existence fixing the strength of Fire Crew in the<\/p>\n
Fire and Safety Department as 76. The man power was<\/p>\n
to be deployed in fire station Nos.1 and 2. In Clause 1<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).No.19067 \/09 & Con. Cases.<\/p>\n
                           :: 2 ::\n<\/p>\n
\nof the settlement it was agreed that man power is<\/p>\n
meant for deployment in fire station No.1 as well as fire<\/p>\n
station No.2 and to         operate the additional pump<\/p>\n
houses that may be put up. It seems that additional<\/p>\n
pump houses were not put up, but the management<\/p>\n
proceeded to shut down fire station No.2 as well. Fire<\/p>\n
station crew was reduced from 76 to 64, after shutting<\/p>\n
down fire station No.2. Ext.P2 shift schedule has been<\/p>\n
published by the management.        In Ext.P2 nothing is<\/p>\n
stated about Fire Station No.2.\n<\/p>\n
          4. The petitioners contend that this exercise<\/p>\n
was in violation of the terms of the settlement and<\/p>\n
separate dispute has been raised as evidenced by<\/p>\n
Exts.P3 and P4 complaints before the 2nd respondent<\/p>\n
Joint Labour Commissioner.\n<\/p>\n
          5. No action has been forthcoming on Exts.P3<\/p>\n
and P4 and hence the writ petition praying for the<\/p>\n
following reliefs:\n<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).No.19067 \/09 & Con. Cases.<\/p>\n
                           :: 3 ::\n<\/p>\n
\n
      a)      Issue a writ of mandamus or any\n\n              other    appropriate   writ   or order\n\n              directing   the     3rd respondent  to\n\n<\/pre>\n
              maintain Fire Station Nos.1 and 2 with<\/p>\n
              fire crew strength as 76 as provided<\/p>\n
              in Ext.P1 settlement.\n<\/p>\n
      b)      Issue a writ of mandamus or any\n\n              other    appropriate   writ   or order\n\n              directing respondents 1 and 2 or\n\n<\/pre>\n
              initiate proceedings against the 3rd<\/p>\n
              respondent      for    offences under<\/p>\n
              Sections 29<\/a> and 31<\/a> of the ID Act for<\/p>\n
              having violated Ext.P1 settlement and<\/p>\n
              Section 9 A read with section 33(1)<\/a><\/p>\n
              (a) of the ID Act<\/a>, 1947 and<\/p>\n
      c)      Issue such other writ, order and<\/p>\n
              directions as are deemed fit in the<\/p>\n
              facts and circumstances of the case.<\/p>\n
          6.  Similar contentions have been raised in<\/p>\n
W.P.(C)No.20854 and 19607\/09.\n<\/p>\n
          7. It is now admitted that the Regional Joint<\/p>\n
Labour Commissioner had occasion to consider the issue<\/p>\n
and conciliation conference is pending on the same<\/p>\n
issue. It seems that the conciliation proceedings are<\/p>\n
afoot.\n<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).No.19067 \/09 & Con. Cases.<\/p>\n
                           :: 4 ::\n<\/p>\n
\n
          8.    Insofar as the petitioner in W.P.(C)<\/p>\n
No.19067\/09 are concerned, there is a contention by<\/p>\n
the management that the first petitioner therein is an<\/p>\n
unrecognized one and would be competent only to<\/p>\n
agitate individual cases, if at all and would not be<\/p>\n
competent to take up general issues. Learned counsel<\/p>\n
for the petitioners also contends that the action of the<\/p>\n
management invites a penalty in terms of Sections 29<\/a><\/p>\n
and 31<\/a> of the ID Act.\n<\/p>\n
          9. The management does not stand in way of<\/p>\n
conciliation conference being convened or conciliation<\/p>\n
proceedings finalized.\n<\/p>\n
          10.    Much of the controversy is centered<\/p>\n
around whether the reduction of the man power in the<\/p>\n
Fire and Safety Department from 76 to 64 amounts to<\/p>\n
change in the conditions of service within the meaning<\/p>\n
of Section 33<\/a> of the ID Act read with the 4th schedule<\/p>\n
and Section 9<\/a> A of the ID Act.\n<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).No.19067 \/09 & Con. Cases.<\/p>\n
                           :: 5 ::\n<\/p>\n
\n
          11.      I       heard     Mr.P.Ramakrishnan,<\/p>\n
Mr.K.S.Madhusoodanan and Mr.D.Anil Kumar learned<\/p>\n
counsel for the petitioners and Mr.E.K.Nandakumar,<\/p>\n
learned counsel for respondents .<\/p>\n
          12. Mr.Madhusoodanan makes a reference to<\/p>\n
items 10 and 11 in the 4th schedule of ID Act<\/a>, which<\/p>\n
refers to the reduction of man power deployed by the<\/p>\n
management. According to him, therefore, reduction of<\/p>\n
the number of staff in the Fire and Safety Department<\/p>\n
from 76 to 64 is not only violation in terms of the<\/p>\n
settlement but also amounts to violation of Section 9A<\/a><\/p>\n
of the ID Act.\n<\/p>\n
          13. Mr.Nandakumar submits that it is a moot<\/p>\n
question as to whether reduction of man power<\/p>\n
amounts to change in the settlement. At any rate,<\/p>\n
Section 33<\/a> of the ID Act provides that any complaint<\/p>\n
regarding the alleged change in the conditions of service<\/p>\n
would also be a subject matter of a conciliation or<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).No.19067 \/09 & Con. Cases.<\/p>\n
                           :: 6 ::\n<\/p>\n
\nsubject matter of adjudication, as the case may be, in<\/p>\n
terms of Section 33A<\/a> of the ID Act. I find force in this<\/p>\n
submission.\n<\/p>\n
          14. In my view, the question as to whether<\/p>\n
the reduction of the man power in the Fire and Safety<\/p>\n
Department amounts to violation or change in the<\/p>\n
conditions is also a matter that will have to be<\/p>\n
considered by the conciliation officer and could<\/p>\n
therefore,   become     an    industrial dispute, if  the<\/p>\n
conciliation conference ends in failure. But there is no<\/p>\n
reason why the conciliation proceedings should be<\/p>\n
delayed indefinitely.\n<\/p>\n
          15.   The question as to whether the action<\/p>\n
taken by the management in reducing the man power<\/p>\n
would amount to breach of the settlement and<\/p>\n
therefore, would invite a penalty in terms of Sections 29<\/a><\/p>\n
and 31<\/a> of the Act is also a matter that has to be decided<\/p>\n
by the conciliation officer.\n<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).No.19067 \/09 & Con. Cases.<\/p>\n
                           :: 7 ::\n<\/p>\n
\n
          16. In the result, the Regional Joint Labour<\/p>\n
Commissioner shall proceed with the conciliation<\/p>\n
conference arising from the dispute raised by the<\/p>\n
petitioners and complete the same within two months<\/p>\n
from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.<\/p>\n
          17. It is made clear that the conciliation officer<\/p>\n
shall bear in mind the observations made in this<\/p>\n
judgment and his report should refer to the contentions<\/p>\n
raised by the unions and the management in this<\/p>\n
regard.\n<\/p>\n
          Writ petitions are disposed of as above.<\/p>\n
                                           Sd\/-\n<\/p>\n
                                       (V.GIRI)
\n                                          JUDGE
\nsk\/<\/p>\n
            \/\/true copy\/\/<\/p>\n
                     P.S. to Judge<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Cochin Refinery Workers … vs Union Of India on 24 July, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 20246 of 2009(A) 1. COCHIN REFINERY WORKERS ASSOCIATION, … Petitioner 2. REFINERY EMPLOYEES UNION, REG.NO. Vs 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY … Respondent 2. THE REGIONAL JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER 3. […]<\/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-257867","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nCochin Refinery Workers ... vs Union Of India on 24 July, 2009 - 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\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Cochin Refinery Workers ... vs Union Of India on 24 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2\" \/>\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=\"2009-07-23T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-07-20T03:11:53+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=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Cochin Refinery Workers … vs Union Of India on 24 July, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-07-20T03:11:53+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2\"},\"wordCount\":972,\"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\\\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2\",\"name\":\"Cochin Refinery Workers ... vs Union Of India on 24 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-07-20T03:11:53+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Cochin Refinery Workers … vs Union Of India on 24 July, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Cochin Refinery Workers ... vs Union Of India on 24 July, 2009 - 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\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Cochin Refinery Workers ... vs Union Of India on 24 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-07-23T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-07-20T03:11:53+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Cochin Refinery Workers … vs Union Of India on 24 July, 2009","datePublished":"2009-07-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-07-20T03:11:53+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2"},"wordCount":972,"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\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2","name":"Cochin Refinery Workers ... vs Union Of India on 24 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-07-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-07-20T03:11:53+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cochin-refinery-workers-vs-union-of-india-on-24-july-2009-2#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Cochin Refinery Workers … vs Union Of India on 24 July, 2009"}]},{"@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\/257867","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=257867"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/257867\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=257867"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=257867"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=257867"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}