LAWS(KER)-2012-4-191

SAJEENDRAN Vs. SECRETARY C I T U

Decided On April 04, 2012
V.P.SAJEENDRAN, PROPRIETOR, M/S.PRIYADARSHINI INDANE SERVICES, AYARKUNNAM KOTTAYAM DISTRICT Appellant
V/S
SECRETARY, C.I.T.U.AYARKUNNAM UNIT, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (i) Is Entry No. 13 of the Schedule of the Kerala Head Load workers Act, 1978 (for short 'the Act') valid, legal and constitutional Is there objectionable transgression by the State legislature into the legislative province earmarked exclusively for the Parliament under Entry Nos. 5 and 53 of List I of Schedule 7 of the Constitution

(2.) According to the petitioners, the work of unloading filled up LPG cylinders from the trucks and stacking them at the godowns of the petitioners as also the work of loading empty gas cylinders into the trucks is purely ancillary and incidental to the work of the distribution boys and they are undertaking such work. The distribution boys are trained for such work. They cannot be reckoned as headload workers defined under the Act - their work of unloading/loading filled up/empty LPG cylinders from/to the trucks being purely ancillary and incidental to their work of delivery of gas cylinders to the consumers and bringing back empty cylinders from the consumers. There is no dispute about the work of the distribution boys carrying filled up gas cylinders from the godowns to the consumers and bringing the empty cylinders back to the godown from the consumers. There is no dispute or claim for the respondents/unions regarding that item of work.

(3.) The dispute is about the work of unloading and stacking filled up gas cylinders from the trucks which carry them to the godowns of the petitioners and loading empty gas cylinders stacked in the godown into the trucks which carry them away. Are the petitioners entitled to get such work done through trained distribution boys employed by them Are the other headload workers of the locality represented by the respondents/unions entitled to claim such work This is the crucial dispute that has arisen. The respondents/unions representing headload workers are claiming such work. They are obstructing the distribution boys of the petitioners. Police protection may be afforded to the petitioners to get such work done by their distribution workers without any obstruction from the respondents/unions, it is prayed.