The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking a direction to the Union of India to consider a Labour Commissioner's report under the Industrial Disputes Act, directing it to pass appropriate orders within three months.
Directed the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P5 report and pass appropriate orders within three months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID
THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2012/29TH AGRAHAYANA 1934
WP(C).No. 22869 of 2012 (G)
PETITIONERS:
WORKING AS CASUAL HELPER (OPERATION) CALICUT AIRPORT AND RESIDING AT PUHENPARAMBIL HOUSE P.O.PATHIRAYAL-676123, (VIA) MANJERY
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.N.UNNIKRISHNAN
RESPONDENTS:
AIR INDIA LIMITED, EROTH CENTRE, BANK ROAD CALICUT-673001.
(CNTD............2)
WP(C).No. 22869 of 2012 (G)
::2::
R1-R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASG OF INDIA R3 TO 6 BY ADV. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR R3 TO 6 BY ADV. SRI.P.GOPINATH R3 TO 6 BY ADV. SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS R3 TO 6 BY ADV. SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20-12-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 22869 of 2012 (G)
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:
| EXT.P1: | LETTER NO.CCJ/MM/OP5 DTD. 31.5.2002. |
|---|---|
| EXT.P2: | ORDER DTD. 31.7.1998 IN W.P.(C).NO.374/1996. |
| EXT.P3: | INTERIM ORDER DTD.15.6.2001 IN C.M.P.NO.61641/2000 IN O.P.NO.36172/2000. |
| EXT.P4: | REPRESENTATION DTD.30.7.2010 SUBMITTED TO R2. |
| EXT.P5: | REPORT NO.8/43/2010-D1 DTD. 25.2.2011. |
| EXT.P6: | LETTER DTD.9.8.2011 TO R1. |
| EXT.P7: | ADVOCATE NOTICE TO R1. |
| EXT.P8: | LETTER DTD.16.11.2011 TO R1. |
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL
// TRUE COPY //
P.A TO JUDGE.
HARUN-UL-RASHID, J.
W.P.(C).No.22869 Of 2012
Dated this the 20th day of December, 2012.
J U D G M E N T
The writ petition is filed seeking to call for the records leading to the issuance of Ext.P5 report, for a declaration that the 1st respondent is duty bound to act upon Ext.P5 report as provided under the provisions of law and communicate the result to the petitioners without further loss of time and for a direction directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass necessary orders on Ext.P5 report of the 2nd respondent.
::2::
W.P.(C).No.22869 Of 2012
2nd respondent to the 1st respondent as required under Section 12 (4) of the Industrial Disputes Act. It is submitted that the conciliation proceedings failed due to adamant attitude of the management and due to their objection to refer the matter before the Consumer Disputes Redressal forum. It is submitted that the casual workers are suffering, that they are denied of justice and also the statutory benefits. The 1st petitioner submitted Ext.P6 representation to the Minister for Labour and Employment, Government of India. The request made is to take urgent action in the matter referred to the National Tribunal. Several representations have made thereafter. Copies are produced as Exts.P7 & P8. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that as per Section 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, the 1st respondent is duty bound to consider the report and if the Government is satisfied that there is a case for reference to a Board, Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal, it may make such reference. Petitioners request this Court to issue a direction directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P5 report.
::3::
W.P.(C).No.22869 Of 2012
In the facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P5 report and pass appropriate orders, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Registry shall communicate a copy of this judgment to the 1st respondent Union of India.
HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge.
bkn/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the 1st respondent is duty bound to consider the report under Section 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act and pass appropriate orders.
Whether a direction should be issued directing the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P5 report and pass orders expeditiously.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Airlines Casual Workers' Union (C.I.T.U.)
K.Rajachandran
Union of India
Regional Labour Commissioner (Central)
Air India Limited
Harun-ul-Rashid
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
