BIJU K.B. Vs. ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :

(2.) The petitioner is the pool leader of pool No.10 Nettoor pool, holding 6A card under the Kerala Head Load Workers Act, Rules and Scheme 1983. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner represents 117 workers and they elected him as pool leader. The pool is located in Nettoor area. In Nettoor area, an Agricultural Urban Wholesale Market (AUW Market) is functioning where there is intense loading and unloading activities are occurring. It is the case of the petitioner that the area in question is exempted from the Provisions of Head Load Workers Act and Rules by a notification issued under Kerala Loading and Unloading (Regulation of Wages and Restriction of Unlawful Practices) Act, 2002. The exemption notification issued on 15/5/2003 however, the said Act was repealed later by the Kerala Headload Workers (Amendment) Act, 2008. Thereafter, it is the case of the petitioner that this Court by Ext.P4 judgment declared that pool workers are to be engaged in view of the lifting of the exemption. Thereafter, when the pool workers attempt to carry out the loading and unloading work in AUW market, a group of head load workers from a neighbouring pool also claimed work, which resulted in series of litigation. In the meanwhile, it is submitted that, the stall owners in AUW market in order to defeat the claim of the pool workers, arranged certain migrant workers styling them as Head Load Workers and submitted applications under Rule 26A of the Kerala Head Load Workers Rules, 1981 (for short "the Rules, 1981") before the 1st respondent and ALO is proceeding to consider application on 23/11/2022. The petitioner submitted Ext.P15 representation to hear the petitioner also, while deciding the application.

(3.) The grievance of the petitioner is that the 1st respondent will proceed with the application filed under Sec. 26A of the Rules, 1981 without hearing him. The petitioner relied the judgment of this Court in Shereef v.Muhammad Shafeek [2017 (2) KHC 873] and also Ext.P11 interim order in which it is stated that the petitioner has got a right of hearing.