Disposed

Ramachandran a. v. Kerala Khadi and Village Industries Board

Kerala HC12 Oct 2021WP(C)/12574/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the third respondent, a KVIC unit, to pay wage arrears and implement a past Industrial Tribunal award. The Court set a six-month deadline, requiring half the amount within three months and the balance thereafter.

What did the court decide?

Directed the third respondent to pay half the dues within three months and the balance within six months; petitioners allowed to recover full amount if initial half is not paid.

Ramachandran a. Vs Kerala Khadi and Village… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 12^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 20TH ASWINA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 12574 OF 2020

¶5

PETITIONERS:

¶6

1 RAMACHANDRAN A.

¶7

AGED 56 YEARS

¶8

S/O. P.KUNHAMBU, APPYAL HOUSE, KANIYAMKUNNU, KOZHUMMAL P O, KARIVELLUR VIA, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶9

2 K.A. RAMESAN AGED 59 YEARS S/O. KANNANPODUVAL, KELOTH, P O PAYYANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶10

3 C.K. VINOD KUMAR, AGED 48 YEARS S/O. D.V. NARAYANA PODUVAL, ARUN NIVAS, ANNUR P O, VIA PAYYANUR, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶11

4 SHYAM KUMAR V V AGED 48 YEARS S/O. KUNHIRAMAN A, VADAKKAN VEEDU, ALAPPADAMBU, ETTUKUDUKKA P O, PAYYANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶12

5 SUKUMARAN P

¶13

AGED 47 YEARS S/O. PADIHATTAYIL GOVINDAN ADIYODI, KANIYAMKUNNU, KOZHUMMAL P O, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶14

6 K.P. RAJU

¶15

AGED 46 YEARS S/O.V. KUNHIKANNAN, KOYIPPURAYIL HOUSE, KOZHUMMAL P O, KARIVELLUR VIA, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV M.V.AMARESAN

¶16

RESPONDENTS:

¶17

1 KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001.

¶18

2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,

¶19

WPC NO.12574 OF 2020

¶20

¶21

LABOUR AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001.

¶22

*ADDRESS OF R2 CORRECTED AS STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, INDUSTRIAL DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., AS PER ORDER DATED 30/09/2021 IN I. A. 1/2021 IN WP(C) 12574/2020.

¶23

3 DEPUTY DIRECTOR COTTON PROCESSING UNIT, KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD, ETTUKUDUKKA P O, PAYYANUR, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670307.

¶24

BY ADVS. PARVATHY KOTTOL, GP N.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SC, KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WPC NO.12574 OF 2020

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 12^th day of October, 2021

¶30

The petitioners are the present and past employees of the respondent Board. Regarding the wage revision and arrears, an industrial dispute was raised which resulted in the award in I.D.No.3/2008 of the Industrial Tribunal, Kozhikode. The Government issued an order modifying the award, which was set aside by this Court by judgment in W.P.(C.) No.12269/2011. The third respondent Board, in consultation with the trade union, by Ext.P2 agreement resolved to implement the award.

¶31

The petitioners have approached this Court lamenting that the above award has not been implemented even now. Without disputing the entitlement of the petitioners and the obligation of the third respondent to implement the terms of award, the learned Counsel for the petitioners invited my attention to Exts.R1(a) to R(c), which are the

¶32

WPC NO.12574 OF 2020

¶33

¶34

communications sent by the third respondent to the second respondent seeking to disburse sufficient funds to meet the liabilities and for support.

¶35

In the light of the above facts, it seems that the only contention now set up by the third respondent Board to object to the liability is the money crunch, which is seen projected in Ext. R1(a) to R1(c). However, the duty to pay the entitlement amount cannot be disputed at all.

¶36

Having considered this, I am inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition by directing the third respondent to disburse the entire amount due to the petitioners as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within an outer limit of six months from today, subject to the condition that one half of it, shall be paid within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and the remaining amount within three months thereafter. If one half of the amount is not paid within the initial three months, the petitioners will be free to proceed against the third

¶37

WPC NO.12574 OF 2020

¶38

¶39

respondent for recovery of the entire amount due.

¶40

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS

JUDGE

SKP/12-10

WPC NO.12574 OF 2020

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12574/2020

¶48

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

¶49

EXHIBIT	P1	TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 11.05.2018 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE HON'BLE CHIEF MINISTER OF KERALA BY GENERAL SECRETARY, KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD COTTON PROCESSING UNIT WORKERS UNION ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS.
EXHIBIT	P2	TRUE COPY OF MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING SIGNED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT SECRETARY, DATED 19.05.2018.
EXHIBIT	P3	TRUE COPY OF DETAILED REPRESENTATION DATED 11.01.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT UNIT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT	P4	TRUE COPY OF AWARD IN I.D. NO.3/2008 PASSED BY COURT OF THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE DATED 2-1-2008.
EXHIBIT	P5	TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C.) 12269/2011 DATED 16/11/2016 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXHIBIT	P6	TRUE COPY OF GO.(RT) NO.963/2017/ID DATED 06/07/2017 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT.
RESPOND	ENTS'	EXHIBITS:

¶50

EXHIBIT R1A	TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.KB5578/2018/K
	DATED 15-09-2018.
EXHIBIT R1B	TRUE COPY OF REMAINDER LETTER WAS ISSUED ON 07-11-2018.
EXHIBIT R1C	TRUE COPY OF LETTER WAS ISSUED TO THE
	GOVERNMENT DATED 15-11-2019.

¶51

TRUE COPY

¶52

P.A.TO JUDGE

Ramachandran a. v. Kerala Khadi and Village Industries Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramachandran a. v. Kerala Khadi and Village Industries Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr.Arun.S Vs K.Srinivasan

Maneesh Kumar T. Vs Mohandas

Arshaj S. Vs Secretary

Sanjeev M. Vs Union of India

Athira R Vs Regional Cancer Centre

Satish Babu V.T. Vs the Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd.