LAWS(KER)-2006-1-40

G SURESH BABU Vs. ASST SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

Decided On January 12, 2006
G.SURESH BABU Appellant
V/S
ASST. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is running a parcel service business. The activities of the petitioner's are mentioned in para 3 of the Writ Petition which is as follows:-

(2.) The main case of the petitioner is that Alleppey Parcel Service is a motor transport undertaking and, therefore, it is covered under the Motor Transport Workers Act. Hence, permanent employees who are exclusively engaged for loading and unloading work are covered under the above Act and, therefore, they need not be registered under the Kerala Headload Workers Act. It is their further contention that three persons are employed by them for doing the loading and unloading work and they applied for registration of the above three workers but identity card was issued to only one worker. Applications for the other two workers were refused and appeals are pending. According to the petitioner, the 4th respondent Union and their workers are creating obstruction to their work demanding headload work and therefore the petitioner wants police protection from this court. An interim police protect ion was granted provided the loading and unloading work is done only by the registered worker. Thereafter, the Writ Petition was amended for a declaration that registration under R.26A of the Kerala Head Load Workers Rules or any other allied provisions under the Kerala Head Load Workers Act and Rules are not required since the workers are governed by the provisions under the Motor Transport Workers Act, Rules and Schemes made thereunder.

(3.) The main question to be considered is whether the application of the Kerala Headload Workers Act is excluded in the petitioner's case. Admittedly, the petitioner's establishment is situated in a covered area under the Head Load Workers Act, 1978 and the Kerala Headload Workers (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Scheme, 1983. It is also admitted that the petitioner's establishment at Palakkad is not registered under the Motor Transport Workers Act and the workers of the petitioner are not registered under the Kerala Motor Transport Workers' Welfare Fund Act, 1985. They are also not enrolled as members of the Welfare Fund Scheme under the Kerala Motor Transport Workers' Welfare Fund Scheme, 1985.