COCHIN PORT TRUST Vs. T.P. VALSAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) .Writ Appeal 769/1991 arises out of O.P. 9054/1989C. Writ Appeals 776/1992 and 1114/1992 are from the decision in O.P. 5524/1992G.

(2.) Appellant in W.A. 769/1991 is Union of India, the first respondent in O.P. 9054/1989-C. That Original Petition was filed by Cochin Port Labour Union (C.I.T.U.) represented by its General Secretary, T. M. Mohammed. The prayer made by the writ petitioner therein was to issue, a writ of mandamus compelling the first respondent, the Union of India, and the second respondent, the Cochin Dock Labour Board, to decasualise the dock workers in the category of Supervisors, Assistant Supervisors, Foreman, Assistant Foreman and General Purpose Mazdoors and bring them under the scheme administered by second respondent. Learned Single Judge by Ms judgment dated 31st January 1991 directed the first respondent to constitute a statutory Advisory Committee in accordance with S.5 of the Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Act, 1948, hereinafter referred to as "the Act", and the Rules framed thereunder. The Central Government was also directed to take further action on the basis of the recommendations of such a Committee. These directions are under challenge In W.A. 769/1991,

(3.) Five persons in the category of Foreman and Assistant Foreman, working under the United Stevedores Association, approached this Court by filing O.P. 5524/1992 praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the Union of India to finalise the draft scheme published in the Gazette dated 27th September 1980 in terms of the provisions contained in S.4 of the Act. Respondents in that Original Petition were the Union of India and the Cochin Port Trust. Learned Single Judge directed the first respondent to finalise the draft scheme as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six months from the date of judgment, namely 28th. May 1992. Aggrieved by this direction, second respondent has preferred Writ Appeal 1114/1092. Cochin Dock Labour Board, which was not a party in the Original Petition, sought leave to appeal against the judgment in O.P. 5524/1992. After obtaining leave the Dock Labour Board has filed Writ Appeal 776/1992. While disposing of O.P. 5524/1992, learned Single Judge directed to finalise the draft scheme as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within six months from the date of judgment. Since the scheme was not 50 finalised, writ petitioners have moved contempt of Court Case 37 of 1993.