N. VIJAYAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, except the 16th petitioner, are stated to be the ex-employee's of the 2nd respondent and the 16th petitioner is the legal heir of one Sri.Chandrahasan Pillai, who was also working with the 2nd respondent herein. The factories wherein the petitioners were working were taken over by the 2nd respondent and on the basis of the judgment of the Apex Court, the factories were given back to the original owners like the 3rd and 4th respondents herein. In the meantime, the petitioners were denied employment.

(2.) Some other workers, similarly placed like the petitioners herein were before this Court, complaining about the afore action of the 2nd respondent. By Ext.P3 judgment dtd. 15/11/2012, a learned Single Judge of this Court found the action of the 2nd respondent not acceptable and hence directed the 2nd respondent to pay salary/basic pay etc., along with the dearness allowance and other benefits to the petitioners before this Court, till the date of superannuation of the respective employers. The post retirement benefits were also directed to be extended. The findings in Exts.P5 stood confirmed by a Division Bench of this Court as per Ext.P4 judgment dtd. 26/3/2014.

(3.) On the basis of the afore directions, the petitioners herein filed W.P.(C)No.23306 of 2015, seeking the benefits extended pursuant to Exts.P3 and P4 judgments. By Ext.P5, dtd. 9/1/2017, a learned Single Judge of this Court found that if the petitioners are also similarly placed like the petitioners in Ext.P3 judgment, they were to be extended the same benefits as contained in Exts.P3 and P4. A similar writ petition came to be filed by two other employees and by Ext.P6 dtd. 23/2/2017, this Court directed the 2nd respondent to consider as to whether similar benefits can be extended to the petitioners therein also.