Disposed

Cochin International Airport Mazdoor Sangh, v. Regional Joint Labour Commissioner

Kerala HC14 Aug 2023WP(C)/7421/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition filed by a registered trade union, the Kerala High Court directed the Regional Joint Labour Commissioner to consider and pass orders on the trade union recognition application submitted by the petitioner within three months of receipt.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 1st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the Ext.P2 application within three months.

Cochin International Airport Mazdoor Sangh… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN MONDAY, THE 14^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 23RD SRAVANA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 7421 OF 2023

¶4

PETITIONER:

¶5

COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT MAZDOOR SANGH, BMS OFFICE, ADAM BAZAR COMPLEX, ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM- 683572, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY M.P. PRADEEP KUMAR

¶6

BY ADVS. T.C.KRISHNA P.RAMAKRISHNAN PREETHI RAMAKRISHNAN (P-212) C.ANIL KUMAR ASHA K.SHENOY PRATAP ABRAHAM VARGHESE GOKUL KRISHNA

¶7

RESPONDENTS:

¶8

1 REGIONAL JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM-682030.

¶9

2 COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED, NEDUMBASSERY PO, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM- 683111 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶10

*3 COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT STAFF FEDERATION (CITU) REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY SATHISH KUMAR P A , AGED 55 YEARS

¶11

*KEERTHANAM, AKAPPARAMBU, VAPPALASSERY P.O NEDUMBASSERY ERNAKULAM – 683 572 (IS IMPLEADED AS THE ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT NO: 3 AS PER ORDER DATED 24-05-2023 IN I.A. 1/2023 IN WP(C) 7421/2023)

¶12

BY ADVS. SRI.BENNY P.THOMAS, SC, BPCL K.S.ARUN KUMAR ELDHO BABY

¶13

WP(C) NO. 7421 OF 2023 : 2 :

¶14

VIJAY SANKAR V.H. JERIN JOSEPH D.PREM KAMATH TOM THOMAS (KAKKUZHIYIL) ABEL TOM BENNY K.S.MUHAMMED SHEFIN BHARATH NAIR PRAISY THOMAS R BY GP ADV.PARVATHY

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C) NO. 7421 OF 2023 : 3 :

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

The petitioner, a registered trade union, had

¶19

submitted Ext.P2 application before the 1^st respondent for certification of recognition, as envisaged under Rule 5 of

¶20

the Kerala Recognition Trade Unions Rules, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules' for short). The grievance of the petitioner is that Ext.P2 application is not yet processed by the 1^st respondent. Accordingly, the petitioner has filed this writ petition for the following reliefs:

¶21

“(a) A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the respondents to conduct a referendum on the basis of Exhibit P-2 application submitted by the petitioner.

¶22

(b) A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the 2^nd respondent not to enter into any settlement without holding a referendum;

¶23

(c) Issue such other writ, order or direction

¶24

WP(C) NO. 7421 OF 2023 : 4 :

¶25

as are deemed just and proper on the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶26

During the pendency of this writ petition, Ext.P2

¶27

application was returned by the 1^st respondent on the ground that the details of other registered trade union, as required in column No.6 of the application is incomplete.

¶28

The 2^nd respondent has filed a counter affidavit. In paragraph '12' of the said affidavit and in Ext.R2(a) produced along with the same, the 2^nd respondent has furnished the necessary details enabling the petitioner to cure the defects pointed out in Ext.P2 application.

¶29

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that on the basis of the details furnished by the 2^nd respondent, Ext.P2 application was re-presented before the 1^st respondent on 11.08.2023.

¶30

In the light of the said submission, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1^st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2

¶31

WP(C) NO. 7421 OF 2023 : 5 :

¶32

application submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with the Rules, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶33

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE

¶36

¶37

WP(C) NO. 7421 OF 2023 : 6 :

¶38

APPENDIX

¶39

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶40

Exhibit P-1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 11/4/2002 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT MANAGEMENT IN CONNECTION WITH HOLDING OF REFERENDUM Exhibit P-2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 15/12/2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT ALONG WITH THE CHALAN RECEIPT Exhibit P-3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 27/01/2023 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT RESPONDENT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R2(a) TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILS OF THE REFERENDUM CONDUCTED IN THE YEAR 2002 .

Cochin International Airport Mazdoor Sangh, v. Regional Joint Labour Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cochin International Airport Mazdoor Sangh, v. Regional Joint Labour Commissioner

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

Sr. Litty Raphael, Vs Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

Sr. Litty Raphael, Vs Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

Pinky Peter, Vs State of Kerala

Ethan Titto, Vs Union of India

K.S.Sivanandan Vs the Welfare Fund Inspector

Chinnamma P.J Vs Union of India(Uoi)