Disposed

Kishore P. George v. District Labour Officer

Kerala HC25 Mar 2022WP(C)/8257/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition regarding non-payment of salary dues, the High Court directed the District Labour Officer to take appropriate action against the private respondents within three months after receiving explanation from the petitioner, without dismissing the petition as barred by delay.

What did the court decide?

Directed the District Labour Officer to take appropriate action against respondents within three months of receiving a certified copy of this judgment.

Kishore P. George Vs District Labour Officer — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 25^TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 4TH CHAITHRA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 8257 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

KISHORE P. GEORGE WKD ROSE, VALANTHARA, CHERANELLORE, KOCHI, PRESIDENT FORMER EMPLOYEES OF SIGNET ACTION COUNCIL, ERNAKULAM

¶8

BY ADV SYAM J SAM

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER DLO OFFICE, KAKKANADU, ERNAKULAM 682030.

¶11

2 USMAN P.K, (M/S SIGNET SOFTWARE PVT LTD SMART CITY SCKOI, A WING 205, THENGODE P.O.KAKKANAD) RESIDENT OF PADATHINKARA (HO) (NEAR TAJ BUILDERS OFFICE), PERINGALA (PO) PALLIKKARA, KAKKANAD, PIN 683565.

¶12

3 ANAS M.K, (M/S SIGNET SOFTWARE PVT LTD SMART CITY SCKO1, A WING 205, THENGODE P.O.KAKKANAD) RESIDENT OF MEZHUKKATTIL S/O MEZHUKKATTIL KUNJU MUHAMMED, NEAR MUSLIM MASJID NALAAM MILE (PO) 683105(PIN), NALAAM MILE, ALUVA

¶13

SRI.JIMMY GEORGE-GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) No.8257/2022

JUDGMENT

This Writ Petition has been filed by one petitioner, but thereafter a

¶19

memo was filed with court fees to the effect that the beneficiaries in the Writ Petition are 13 persons and this Court noticing the aforementioned fact passed following order dated 10.3.2022:

¶20

“The learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo dated 11.02.2022, producing the list of members on whose behalf the reliefs, has been sought in the writ petition. According to the said memo, the beneficiaries are 13 in numbers.

¶21

It is submitted that the petitioner has paid court fee in respect of these 13 persons. In case, the petitioner has paid court fee in respect of 13 persons referred to in the memo dated 11.02.2022, the writ petition may be numbered and send to the Bench for admission.”

¶22

Thus the Writ Petition shall be construed to have been filed on behalf of 13 persons as per the order aforementioned.

¶23

Petitionerr had worked in a software Company owned by respondent Nos.2 and 3 in the year 2016-17, but no salary was paid, despite the fact that assurance was given by the management that the entire arrears would be paid. salary dues certificate as reflected in Ext.P1 and details of the pending salary as Ext.P2, have been rekiednin support of the claim. Representation Ext.P3 dated 13.12.2018 was submitted, but no action has been taken. Thus the petitioner approached this Court on 15.3.2019 and the Writ Petition was numbered

WP(C) No.8257/2022

in 2022.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there cannot be any reason of delay and laches as the cause of action arose when the petitioners were not paid the salary and when no action has been taken on the representation nor respondent No.1 has taken any action against the private respondents for recovery of the amount.

¶28

Learned Government Pleader submits that there is no proof that whether the representation Ext.P3 has been received in the office of the District Labour Officer, Kakkanadu, Ernakulam for taking action against the respondents on account of non payment of the salary though Writ Petition has also been filed belatedly.

¶29

I have heard the counsel for the parties and appraised the paper book.

¶30

The statutory dues towards the salary are to be paid by the employer to the employees after having attended the service for a particular period, the details of which are reflected in Exts.P1 and P2.

¶31

Without calling upon respondent No.2 as it would defray the cost of litigation, I dispose of the Writ Petition by issuing directions to respondent No.1 to take a call on the representation for taking appropriate action against respondents 1 and 2 after receipt of the information and particulars from the petitioner qua the grievance

¶32

WP(C) No.8257/2022

¶33

¶34

towards non payment of the salary, in accordance with law. Let this exercise be undertaken within a period of three months from the date of

¶35

receipt of a certified copy of the judgment.

Sd/-

AMIT RAWAL JUDGE

csl

WP(C) No.8257/2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8257/2022

¶42

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶43

Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SALARY DUES CERTIFICATE OF PETITIONERS AND OTHERS (13 IN NUMBERS) Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PENDING SALARY DETAILS SUBMITTED TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT

Kishore P. George v. District Labour Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kishore P. George v. District Labour Officer

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

T.K.Sundaresan Vs the District Collector

M/S. Vision Academy Vs the Deputy Labour Commissioner

Sudheer Ram S., Vs Biju Prabhakar

K.P. Rajagopalan Vs Renjith v v

Sujith Vijayan Vs Union of India

Joseph K.V. Vs Kerala Motor Transport Worker Welfare Fund Board