Jaffer K v. The Dlo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/21ST PHALGUNA, 1936 --------------------------- PETITIONER(S):
--------------------------
1. JAFFER K, S/O. MAMMU AGED 36, PROPRIATOR, J.F.C. FRUITS CENTRE TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR DIST.
2. K.V.SHAFEEQUE, S/O.ABU MAIN ROAD, TALIPARAMBA.
3. MUTHALIB.P, S/O.HASSAN, POOMANGALOORAKATH HOUSE, KARIAMBALAM, TALIPARAMBA.
4. RASHEED.K., S/O. SADULI KUTTUKKAN VEEDU, PULIMBARAMBA, TALIPARAMBA.
5. VAHID.V.M,S/O.MUSTHAFA VARAMBU MURIAN VEEDU, PULIMBARAMBA, TALIPARAMBA.] BY ADV. SRI.P.NARAYANAN RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER KANNUR.
2. THE CHAIRMAN,LOCAL COMMITTEE FOR KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD CIVIL STATION KANNUR.,
3. C.ABDUL RZAK, S/O.MAMMU CHULLIYODAN, STU MEMBER, TALIPARAMBA MARKET THALIPARAMBA.
4. PARAPURATH ISMAYIL S/O. MOIDEEN STU MEMBER, TALIPRAMBA MARKET, THALIPARAMBA.
5. CHERUKUNNONTAKATH ASHRAF,S/O. MAMMU STU MEMBER, TALIPRAMBA MARKET, THALIPARAMBA.
-2-
6. PARAPURATH ASHRAF,S/O. MOIDEEN STU MEMBER, TALIPRAMBA MARKET, THALIPARAMBA.
7. K.P.ASEEN, S/O.HAMSA,STU MEMBER, TALIPARAMBA MARKET, THALIPARAMBA.
8. K.ISMAYIL,S/O.MUHAMMED,STU MEMBER, TALIPARAMBA MARKET, THALIPARAMBA.
BY SRI.O.V.MANIPRASAD BY ADV. SRI.JOY GEORGE, SC, KHWWB BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. MANOJ KUNJACHAN BY SRI.KOSHY GEORGE, SC, KHLWWB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12-032015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
APPENDIX EXHIBITS P1COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.2.2005 IN WP(C).4613 OF 2005 P2COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.8.2005 IN WP(C).19660 OF 2005 P3COPY OF THE ORDER NO.55 OF 2005 DATED 27.12.2005 PASSED BY THE ALO P4COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC. 15799 OF 2006 P5COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED AGAINST EXT.P3 BY R3 TO R8 P6COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONERS P7COPY OF THE DEPOSITIONS RECORDED BY R1 IN THE APPEAL P8COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 14.8.2007 IN WP(C).18790 OF 2007 P9COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G3/1941/04 (ii) DATED 29.1.2008 PASSED BY R1 //True Copy// P.S. To Judge
K.VINOD CHANDRAN, J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).No. 5621 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated 12th March, 2015 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
JUDGMENT
The issue agitated in the above writ petition is as to whether existing employees of an establishment could seek registration under Rule 26A of the Kerala Head Load Workers Rules, 1981, if they had not been engaged as a head load worker prior to such application.
2. The petitioners herein are the owner of the establishment and their employees who sought registration under Rule 26A, which was granted. However, The ground on which registrations were cancelled was that the employees who sought for registration were the salesmen of the establishment and not head load workers.
3. Essentially it is to be noticed that
WP(C).5621/08 none could carry on head load work in a notified area without registration under Rule 26A of the Rules. An establishment, which has loading and unloading work and does not have anybody in its register with registration under Rule 26A, definitely will have to employ the pool workers.
4. The employer all the same has the competence to appoint workers, even existing workmen, as head load workers and also seek registration under Rule 26A. That was precisely what was done in the present case. The question of existing workers, being entitled to be registered under Rule 26A, is no longer res integra, since this Court has in Rajeev v. District Labour Officer (2010 (4) KLT 783) held in favour of such employees seeking registration. In such circumstances, Ext.P9 order would stand set aside, on the basis of the binding precedent. The registration granted to
WP(C).5621/08 the petitioners would be upheld.
The writ petition is allowed. Parties are left to suffer their respective costs.
Sd/- K.VINOD CHANDRAN Judge Mrcs //True Copy//