Disposed

Thara S v. Consumerfed

Kerala HC1 Sept 2016WP(C)/27082/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judge order disposed of writ petitions challenging the termination of sales assistants. The court held that closing the Nanma Stores was a policy decision immune from interference. It ruled that workers should seek statutory reliefs from authorities rather than through the court and dismissed the plea for preferential appointment.

What did the court decide?

Writ petitions disposed of with observations that statutory relief lies with appropriate authorities and not the court.

Thara S Vs Consumerfed — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016/10TH BHADRA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 27082 of 2016 (I) ----------------------------

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

1.	THARA S.,
	D/O. PADMAJAN,
	SALE ASST. VETTIL THECKATHIL,
	CHINGOLI P.O., CHINGOLI, ALAPUZHA.
2.	SHYLAJA P., W/O. UDAYAN, SALE ASST AKKATHARA, KARTHIKAPALLY P.O., KARTHIKAPALLY, ALAPUZHA.
3.	ANANDAVALLI K.S., W/O SIVADASAN C., SALE ASSTN. PUTHENKANDATHIN VETTUVENI P.O., HARIPPAD ALAPUZHA.
4.	SREEJA K., W/O. AJU, SALE ASST SREERANGAM, CHINGOLI P.O., CHINGOLI, ALAPUZHA.
5.	SINDHU R., W/O. SURESH, SALE ASST. NILAKCAL HOUSE AYIKKAD CHEPPAD P.O., CHINGOLI, ALAPUZHA.
6.	ANUSHA R., W/O. NISHAD KASHI, SALE ASST. THAZHAVANA PATHAYANKARA, THARIKKUMPUZHA ALAPUZHA.
7.	REMYA G. NAIR, W/O. SAJIKUMAR, SALE ASST. VENATTETH, THRIVERUNTHURA P.O., CHENNITHALA, ALAPUZHA.
8.	SUPRABHA. R,
	W/O. SUNILKUMAR S., SALES ASST,
	ROHANI, CHINGOLI P.O., CHINGOLI, ALAPUZHA.

Msv/

-2-

-2-

WP(C).No. 27082 of 2016 (I)

¶12

9. KUNJUMOL. W/O. MUHAMMED KOYA SALES ASST. UTHAYAMPARAMBIL, ARATTUPUZHA NORTH P.O., ARATTUPUZHA/

¶13

10. SUNIJA SIVANAD, W/O. JINU.G, SALES ASST. MAMPARAMPIL HOUSE, ERIKKAVU P.O, HARIPAD, ALAPPUZHA.

¶14

11. AMBILI P., W/O. SHIJUMON D., SALES ASST, PULLATTUPARAMBIL VADAKKATHIL, ERIKKAVU P.O., KARTHIKAPPALLY, ALAPPUZHA.

¶15

12. SARITHA M., W/O. BINEESH, SALES ASST. PUTHENKATIL, ERIKKAVU P.O., ALAPPUZHA.

¶16

13. JAYACHANDRAN, S/O. PADMANABHAN, SALE ASST. MANGALASSERILKATIL, ERIKKAVU P.O., KARTHIKAPPALLY, ALAPPUZHA.

¶17

14. SALINI, W/O. RAJIV, SALES ASST, PUTHEN PURECKAL HOUSE, KATILMARKET P.O., THAMALLACKAL SOUTH, ALAPUZHA.

¶18

15. BEENA, W/O. VISHVAMBHARAM, SALES ASST, THETTIKATIL VALIYAPARAMBU, P.O. THRIKKUNNAPPUZHA, ALAPUZHA.

¶19

16. SUCHITHRA, W/O DILEEP, SALE ASST., DHINESHBHAVANAM, VALIYAPARAMBU P.O.,THRIKKUNNAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA.

¶20

17. SREEJA MOHAN, RAJESH KUMAR V.K., SALES ASST, SAIKRIPA MUTHUKULAM NORTH, CHEPPAD P.O., ALAPPUZHA.

Msv/

-3-

-3-

WP(C).No. 27082 of 2016 (I)

¶25

18. BINI VIJAYAN, W/O. ANIL G., SALES ASST, VANCHIKOIKAL, KEERIKKAD P.O., RAMAPURAM, ALAPPUZHA.

¶26

19. INDHUKALA C., W/O. SHAJI, SALES ASST, KAYALIL, MUTHUKULAM SOUTH P.O., ALAPPUZHA.

¶27

20. RAGESH, S/O. RAJENDRAN NAIR, SALES ASST, EDAYATOOR EVOOR NORTH, CHEPPAD P.O., ALAPUZHA.

¶28

21. SURESH S., SALES ASST, PUTHENKANDATHIL, VETTUVENI P.O., HARIPAD, ALAPPUZHA. 22. JARIYA, W/O. RAJA, SALES ASST., KUTTIKKATTUVADAKATHIL, PALLANA P.O., ALALPPUZHA. 23. PREEJA, W/O. RATNAPPAN, SALES ASST., VALIYACHIRAYIL LEKSHMITHOTHU, PALLANA P.O., ALAPUZHA. 24. NUSAIBA, W/O. SALIM, SALES ASST., PUTHURAYILIL, PALLANA P.O., ALAPPUZHA.

¶29

25. RANI R., W/O. AJITHKUMAR, SALES ASST., VAZHURETH HOUSE, MAHADEVIKAD P.O., MAHADEVIKAD, ALAPUZHA.

¶30

26. ANILA N.J., W/O. FRANCIS T, SALES ASST, KOODENTHARA THOPPIL MAHADEVIKADU P.O., ALAPUZHA.

¶31

27. SANDHYA MOL B., W/O. BHASI, SALES ASST., CHERIYASSERIL PALLIPPATTUMURI, THRIKAUPUZHA P.O., MAHADEVIKAD, ALAPUZHA.

msv/

-4-

-4-

WP(C).No. 27082 of 2016 (I)

¶36

28. SACHU CHANDRAN, S/O. CHANDRAN, SALES ASST., CHANDRALAYAM, MAHADEVIKADU P.O., KUMARAPURAM, ALAPUZHA.

¶37

29. REMYA R., W/O. SOMARAJAN, SALES ASST., AKKARAKKAARANTE PARAMPIL KOTTEMURI, THRIKUPUZHA P.O., ALAPPUZHA.

¶38

30. RAKHI, W/O. HARILAAL, SALES ASST., ABHAYAM PATHIYANKARA, THRIKUPUZHA P.O., ALAPPUZHA.

¶39

31. SIBI. D., DASAPUTHRAN, SALES ASST., KADALICHIRAYIL, KOTTAMURI, TRIKKUNNAPPUZHA P.O. ALAPPUZHA.

¶40

32. AKHILA, W/O. RAJESH R., SALES ASST., PATTAMPARAMPIL, PALLANA P.O., ALAPUZHA.

¶41

33. SAFIYATH, W/O. EBRAHIMKUTTY, SALES ASST. THAILPUTHUVAL, ARATTUPUZHA NORTH P.O., ALAPPUZHA.

¶42

34. JAYASREE S., W/O. MURALEEDHARAN NAIR, SALES ASST., MURALAK CHINGOLI P.O., CHINGOLI, ALAPUZHA.

¶43

35. JAYASREE P.L., W/O. K.R. SREEKANDAN, SALES ASST., SREEBHAVANAM CHINGOLI P.O., CHINGOLI, ALAPPUZHA.

¶44

BY ADV. SRI.JOBY CYRIAC

¶45

RESPONDENT(S):

¶46

1. THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE CONSUMERS' FEDRATION LTD., CONSUMER(FED) REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR ERNAKULAM, PIN- 682 017.

msv/

-6-

-6-

WP(C).No. 27082 of 2016 (I)

¶51

2. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS (ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE) THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE CONSUMERS FEDERATION LTD, REPRESENTED BY IT CONVENER ERNAKULAM-682 012

¶52

3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVES CONSUMERS FEDERATION LTD, ERNAKULAM, PIN- 682 012.

¶53

4. THE REGISTRAR,

¶54

CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, STATE OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM- 695 001.

¶55

5. THE STATE OF KERALA,

¶56

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION SOCIETY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN- 695 001.

¶57

R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN, SC, CONSUMERFED SRI.RAJU JOSEPH (SR.)

¶58

R4 & R5 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.S.SHEEJA

¶59

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-09-2016, ALONG WITH WPC. 27196/2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶60

msv/

¶61

WP(C).No. 27082 of 2016 (I)

¶62

APPENDIX

¶63

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶64

EXT.	P1 TRUE COPY OF CASH RECEIPT DATED 05.01.2013 ISSUED TO 1ST PETITIONER.
EXT.	P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE CASH BOOK DATED 31.07.2014 SHOWING CUTTING OF CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS ESI AND PF FROM THE WAGES OF 1ST PETITIONER.
EXT.	P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PUBLIC NOTICE ISSUED/AFFIXED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXT.	P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 13.08.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶65

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶66

------------------------

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S.TO JUDGE

Msv/

SHAJI P. CHALY, J.

¶72

W.P.(C). No.27082 & 27196 of 2016

¶73

----------------------------------------------Dated this the 1^st day of September, 2016

¶74

JUDGMENT

¶75

These writ petitions are materially connected and the issue is with respect to a claim for continuous employment of the petitioners in the Nanma Stores owned by the 1^st respondent. Material facts for the disposal of the writ petitions discernible from W.P.(C) No.27082/2016 are recited hereunder, which will guide the fate of other writ petition also.

¶76

Petitioners are appointed on daily wage basis and were working as Sales Assistant in the Nanma Stores owned by the 1^st respondent for last several years. Each petitioner had deposited Rs.10,000/- towards the Staff Security Deposit and they have been paying contribution towards PF and ESI. Being the workers having more than one year service, petitioners are 'workmen' as contemplated under Section 2(S) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, is the contention. That apart, according to the petitioners, Section 25(F) of the Act

¶77

W.P.(C). Nos.27082 & 27196 of 2016 2

¶78

stipulates some conditions for retrenchment of a workman including one month prior notice in writing indicating the reasons for retrenchment and statutory compensation. Section 25 (G) deals with the rule of 'last come first go' in case of retrenchment. But without following those modalities, respondents are taking hasty and illegal steps to terminate the petitioners indirectly. It is in this background, petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking appropriate direction.

¶79

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Senior Government Pleader and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent and perused the documents on record and the pleadings put forth by the respective petitioners.

¶80

The sole issue to be considered is whether petitioners are entitled to get any relief directing respondents 1 to 3 not to terminate the petitioners from service of the 1^st respondent except through process of law contemplated under Section 25 (F)and (G) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. In my

¶81

W.P.(C). Nos.27082 & 27196 of 2016 3

¶82

considered opinion, the issue with respect to continuous employment of the petitioners in the Nanma Stores is a policy decision to be adopted by the 1^st respondent. Admittedly, 1^st respondent has decided to stop Nanma Stores consequent to various factors including financial instability and viability of the 1^st respondent. A Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No.27748/2016 dated 22.8.2016 held that such a decision is a policy decision and the constitutional courts will be slow in interfering with such matters. I am perfectly in agreement with the proposition of law laid down accordingly. Therefore, there is no rhyme or reason in contending that, the 1^st respondent should be directed to continue the Nanma Stores enabling the petitioners to continue in the service of the 1^st respondent bank.

¶83

However, petitioners have also a case that they are entitled to get notices as provided under the Industrial Disputes Act before any termination is done. Admittedly, on a reading of the said provisions contained under Section 25(F)

¶84

W.P.(C). Nos.27082 & 27196 of 2016 4

¶85

of the Industrial Disputes Act, it is categoric and clear that, if the petitioners are entitled to any of the benefits conferred thereunder and the same is not followed by the statutory authorities, a cause of action arises to the petitioners when an action pursuant to the said provision are undertaken by the 1^st respondent. Even according to the petitioners, no such notices are issued by the 1^st respondent before terminating the service of the petitioners. However, it is also contended that, petitioners are not paid wages and they are idling in the shops without any work being done. Obviously, if the petitioners are affected in any manner due to non-observance of the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act or any other provision of law or otherwise, it is for the petitioners to approach the respective statutory authorities and seek necessary reliefs. Therefore, in that regard also, petitioners are not entitled to succeed.

¶86

However, learned counsel for the petitioners made a fervent plea that, if the 1^st respondent is making any

¶87

W.P.(C). Nos.27082 & 27196 of 2016 5

¶88

employment, petitioners shall be provided a precedence for appointment in terms of Section 25(H) of the Industrial Disputes Act. It is for the petitioners to persuade the 1^st respondent for any such relief. In due course, if there is any change to the prevailing circumstances, it will be considered by the 1^st respondent, in accordance with law.

¶89

Therefore, the writ petitions are disposed of with the said observations.

¶90

Sd/- SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE

¶91

smv 01.09.2016

Thara S v. Consumerfed

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thara S v. Consumerfed

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

O.J. Peter Vs Sri. Antony Chacko

Gomathiyamma Vs Babu Kuriakose

Sudha K.K Vs Kerala Public Service Commission

Santhosh Joseph Vs the Managing Director Ksrtc

Ambika Amma G. Vs Karunagapally Co-Operative

Ajeesh N.K Vs the State of Kerala