Dismissed

P.K. Gopalakrishnan v. the Kerala Headload Workers Welfare Board

Kerala HC21 Jun 2012WP(C)/7190/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-page order in a writ petition involving registered headload workers aggrieved by non-implementation of Board decisions was disposed of. The Court held the dispute fell under Section 21 of the Kerala Headload Workers Act, 1978, and directed the petitioners to approach the appropriate authority rather than being entertained under the Writ Jurisdiction.

What the court decided

AI extract

P.K. Gopalakrishnan Vs the Kerala Headload… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JUNE 2012/31ST JYAISHTA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 7190 of 2012 (W)

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

P.K. GOPALAKRISHNAN, AGED 44 YEARS

¶8

KURUDAMPARAMBU HOUSE, NANDIKULANGARA, MANNAM P.O.

¶9

N.PARAVUR.

¶10

SUMOD KUMAR

¶11

NELLIPPILLIL HOUSE, VANIYAKKAD, MANNAM P.O.

¶12

K.M.SHAJAHAN

¶13

THAITHARA, VANIYAKKAD, MANNAM P.O.

¶14

N.PARAVUR.

¶15

V.M.MURALI MANU MANDIRAM, VANIYAKKAD, MANNAM P.O. N.PARAVUR.

¶16

BY ADV. SRI.K.A.MANZOOR ALI

¶17

RESPONDENTS:

¶18

THE KERALA HEADLOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD ERNAKULAM.

¶19

CHAIRMAN

¶20

THE KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD

¶21

PARAVUR SUB OFFICE, N.PARAVUR.

¶22

THE MANAGER

¶23

THE KERALA STATE WARE HOUSING CORPORATION

¶24

VANIYAKKAD, MANNAM P.O., N.PARAVUR.

¶25

Addl.4. POOL LEADER

¶26

POOL NO.12, VANIYAKKAD 683513.ADDL R4 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 09/04/2012 IN 5352/2012.

¶27

BY ADV. SRI.KOSHY GEORGE, SC, KHLWWB BY ADV. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR BY ADV. SRI.P.GOPINATH BY ADV. SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS BY ADV. SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI BY ADV. SRI.V.P.PRASAD BY SRI.KOSHY GEORGE, SC, KHLWWB

¶28

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-06-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶29

APPENDIX

¶30

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS

¶31

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARDS OF THE 1ST PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶32

EXHIBIT P1(a): TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARDS OF THE 2ND PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶33

EXHIBIT P1(b): TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARDS OF THE 3RD PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶34

EXHIBIT P1(c): TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARDS OF THE 4TH PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶35

EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE MEETING OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 29-02-2012.

¶36

EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATD 03-03-2012 SENT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶37

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.S.TO JUDGE

K. SURENDRA MOHAN, J.

¶42

W.P(C) NO: 7190 OF 2012

¶43

Dated this the 21^st June, 2012.

¶44

The petitioners are registered headload workers under the Kerala Headload Workers Act, 1978 (the 'Act' for short). They have filed this writ petition aggrieved by the non-implementation of Exts.P2 and P3 decisions of the first respondent.

¶45

The additional fourth respondent has filed a counter affidavit producing Ext.R4(c), copy of an appeal filed by the said respondent before the first respondent. According to the counsel for the first respondent, Ext.R4(c) is not maintainable before the said authority. The dispute would have to be determined by the Assistant Labour Officer in exercise of the powers under Section 21 of the Act. The counsel for the third respondent submits that they had not made any request for grant of registration to any additional workers, since they already have sufficient number of workers registered under the Act.

¶46

Since the issue is one that should be decided in exercise of the jurisdiction under Section 21 of the Act, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition. The same is accordingly disposed of

¶47

WPC 7190/2012

¶48

¶49

directing the petitioner to move the appropriate authority under Section 21 of the Act for a resolution of the disputes between the petitioner and the respondents.

¶50

Sd/K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge

¶51

jj /True copy/

¶52

P.S.to Judge

P.K. Gopalakrishnan v. the Kerala Headload Workers Welfare Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

P.K. Gopalakrishnan v. the Kerala Headload Workers Welfare Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Ernakulam Dist.Co-Op.Bank Vs State of Kerala

M/S.Sree Durga Cashew Factory Vs the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner

K.Thankachan Vs the Rta, Alappuzha and Others

Sushama Vs the New India Assurance

P.v.Kuriachan Vs Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Trichur

V. Sudha Vs the Sale Officer & Inspector for Arbitration and Execution II