THOMAS PASCAL Vs. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are aggrieved with the obstruction caused, by respondents 3 to 6 Unions, to the work of loading timber logs into the lorry and transporting it out of their property. The area is not a scheme covered area and the work is also not a head load work. Even then, the petitioners were agreeable to associate the workers of the Unions insofar as tying up the logs before loading them into the trucks by mechanical means. However, respondent Unions were demanding exorbitant amounts; upon which, the petitioners were forced to file the above writ petition before this Court.

(2.) We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, the respondent Unions, the learned Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel for the 7th respondent.

(3.) The learned Standing Counsel for the 7th respondent categorically submits that the area is not a scheme covered area. It is also clear that there is no head load work to be carried on since the timber has to be loaded into the vehicles by mechanical means. In such circumstance, respondents 3 to 6 cannot have any right to demand work, which is now available in the petitioners' property.