Kerala High Court
Mr.Vellappally Natesan vs The State Of Kerala on 28 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
THURSDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 8TH MAGHA, 1942
WP(C).No.27849 OF 2020(E)
PETITIONERS:
1 MR.VELLAPPALLY NATESAN,
S/O.LATE KESAVAN, CHAIRMAN, SREE NARAYANA TRUST
MEDICAL MISSION, KADANMUKKU, KOLLAM 691 001.
2 DR.JAYA DEVAN,
AGED 75 YEARS,
S/O.LATE GOVIND, SECRETARY, SREE NARAYANA TRUST
MEDICAL MISSION, KADANMUKKU, KOLLAM 691 001.
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)
SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE
SRI.P.PRIJITH
SRI.THOMAS P.KURUVILLA
SRI.R.GITHESH
SRI.AJAY BEN JOSE
SRI.MANJUNATH MENON
SRI.SACHIN JACOB AMBAT
SHRI.HARIKRISHNAN S.
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (MINISTRY OF LABOUR),
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
2 THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,
KOLLAM CITY, PIN 691 008.
3 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
KOLLAM, EAST POLICE STATION, KOLLAM-691 001.
4 THE REGIONAL JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER,
KOLLAM-691 003.
5 THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER,
KOLLAM-691 013.
WP(C).No.27849 OF 2020(E) 2
6 PRIVATE HOSPITAL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION,
INTUC, JETTY ROAD, KOLLAM 691 001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY,
MR. JAYAPRAKASH.
7 KOLLAM JILLA PRIVATE HOSPITAL EMPLOYEES UNION
(CITU)
CITU BHAVAN, KOLLAM-691 013.
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MR.RAJMOHAN
8 KERALA PRIVATE HOSPITAL WORKERS FEDERATION (UTUC)
RSP OFFICE, KOLLAM 691 013, REPRESENTED BY ITS
GENERAL SECRETARY, MR FRANCIS JOHN.
9 MANJU V, LAKSHMI VILASAM, VILAKKUVATTOM P.O,
PUNALUR, PIN 691 305.
* ADDL.R10 TO R13 IMPLEADED
10 REENI THOMAS, AGED 50,
W/O. SOMAN, THIVILAKATHUVEEDU, THEKKA MURI,
EAST KALLADA, KOLLAM.
11 JIJI I, AGED 45,
LEKSHMI NIVAS, SREEBHADRA NAGAR - 175,
ULIYACOVIL, KOLLAM.
12 SAJIMOL S.R.,
AGED 47 YEARS,
W/O.VINAYAN, VINAYAKAM, NALANDA NAGAR,
39A, AYATHIL P.O., KOLLAM.
13 SANTHI.P.,
AGED 48 YEARS,
W/O. SURESH KUMAR, RESIDING ARACKAL HOUSE,
CHAVARA (BRIDGE) P.O., CHAVARA,
KOLLAM, PIN-691583.
* ADDL. R10 TO R13 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
14.01.2021 IN IA 1/2021 IN WP(C) NO.27849/2020.
R1 TO R5 BY SRI.K.V.SOHAN, STATE ATTORNEY
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.P. THAJUDEEN
WP(C).No.27849 OF 2020(E) 3
R6-R8 BY ADVS. SRI.M.RAJENDRAN NAIR
SMT.M.SANTHY
R10 BY ADV. D.ANIL KUMAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
28.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.27849 OF 2020(E) 4
JUDGMENT
This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is for a
direction to the respondents 2 and 3 to render effective police protection to
the petitioners for running the Sanker's Institute of Medical Sciences and the
Sanker's Hospital, Kollam from any obstructions caused by striking workers.
The petitioners have also sought protection for the willing medical as well as
paramedical staff and employees of the hospital to attend the hospital
without any hindrance or obstructions from the respondent unions and the
other workers.
2. The petitioners state that the Sree Narayana Trust Medical
Mission established a Hospital in the year 1970 by name SSM Hospital
Kollam. In 2002, a Super Speciality Block was established and it was named
as Sanker's Institute of Medical Sciences. Both these Hospitals are situated
in the same premises. About 400 employees are working in both the
hospitals. Lately, due to various factors, the influx of patients reduced. The
expenditure far exceeds the income and to keep the hospital afloat, drastic
measures had to be taken. The management took a decision to retrench 33
hospital aids and 7 persons engaged in cleaning by strictly adhering to the
procedure provided under the Industrial Disputes Act. Notices were issued to
the workers and individual cheques towards retrenchment compensation,
salary in lieu of one month notice and the gratuity payable was enclosed.
The entire procedure has been transparent and this fact would be evident
from Exhibits-P1 to P4. However, the retrenched workers with the support of
the Union leaders refused to accept the decision of the management. On
10.12.2020, they assembled near the portico of the hospital and started
shouting slogans, causing grave inconvenience to the staff, patients and
visitors. They also obstructed the willing workers from performing their
duties. In the said circumstances, Exhibit-P6 representation was submitted
before the 2nd and 3rd respondents seeking protection to the staff and
employees of the hospital. The grievance of the petitioners is that no
assistance is being rendered as the Police have taken a stand that they have
no reason to interfere in labour disputes. It is stated that the workers have
put up a shed near the entrance of the hospital building and they have been
raising slogans to intimidate willing employees. The petitioners contend that
the functioning of the hospital is almost paralysed from 11.12.2020. The
above inaction of the Police have led the petitioners to approach this Court.
3. The 7th respondent has filed a counter-affidavit. It is
contended that the decrease in the number of patients is only a temporary
phenomenon due to the pandemic. It is contended that the workers, who
have been retrenched have been working for decades on paltry wages. If
they are retrenched from service without following the principles of last come
first go, it would result in serious violation of human rights. It is contended
that the workers were retrenched without following the mandatory
requirement under Section 25 F of the ID Act. Raising all these contentions
and complaining of unfair labour practices, the petitioners have approached
the respondents 4 and 5 and they have initiated conciliation proceedings.
However, the management refused to cooperate. It is further contended that
most of the workers are female employees and they are carrying out a
peaceful agitation in a corner of the hospital premises without causing any
inconvenience to either the staff, patients or the management. The
functioning of the hospital is not at all affected by the peaceful agitation
carried out by the workers.
4. The 3rd respondent has filed a counter-affidavit. It is stated
that a complaint seeking violation of law and order was received from the
petitioners and the Police have taken prompt action by deploying a team of
officers to ensure that the situation does not go out of hand. It is stated that
no hindrance is being caused to the working of the hospital by the retrenched
employees and union leaders. It is also stated that if any untoward incident
occurs the Police shall intervene and appropriate action shall be taken to
protect the rights of the petitioners.
5. I have heard Sri.S.Sreekumar, the learned Senior Counsel
appearing for the petitioners as instructed by Sri.P.Martin Jose, the learned
Counsel, Sri.K.V.Sohan the learned State Attorney, Sri.M.Rajendran Nair, the
learned counsel, who has appeared for respondents 6 to 8 and Sri.D. Anil
Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the additional respondents 10 to
13.
6. When it was brought to the notice of this Court during the
earlier postings that conciliation proceedings are pending before the
respondents 4 and 5, this Court by order dated 04.01.2021 had directed both
sides to appear before the 5th respondent and take part in the conciliation
proceedings and make an attempt to settle the disputes. This Court also had
recorded the undertaking of the learned counsel appearing for respondents 6
to 8 that they shall not cause any obstruction or hindrance to the functioning
of the hospital. It appears that the conciliation proceedings are still pending.
7. Having considered the entire submissions I find that the
petitioners have retrenched certain workers and it appears that the workers
are seriously aggrieved by the manner in which they were retrenched. They
have raised a dispute before the District Labour Officer and conciliation
proceedings are pending. Simultaneously, they have also set up a shed
inside the hospital premises and they have been conducting an agitation from
11.12.2020. From the submissions, it appears that both the parties have not
budged even an inch.
8. The workers do have the right to strike against oppressive acts
of the management or to secure better conditions of service. This Court
cannot shut its eyes to the plight of the workers when they contend that they
have been given a raw deal by the management. This Court in the said
circumstances will not be justified in arming the management with the might
of the police to quell a legitimate agitation. At the same time, one cannot be
oblivious of the grave situation facing the nation and this state in the form of
a deadly pandemic. Health care facilities such as the one run by the
petitioners have a major role to play in these times. When a sick patient is
brought to the hospital, what he or she would expect is a peaceful and calm
environment and pleasant and warm health care professionals. This would be
a source of great comfort to the patient and the family members who
accompany him or her. They would be traumatised if they hear slogans being
raised inside the hospital premises. In that view of the matter, the workers
will have to remove themselves from the hospital premises and if they choose
to continue the strike, find out a convenient place so that no obstruction is
caused to the peaceful running of the hospital.
9. From the submissions advanced by both sides, I gather that the
hospital is situated on the northern side of the Kollam Shencotta National
Highway 744. There is a road leading to Asramom starting from the Kollam
Shencotta road and passing through the western side of the Hospital known
as the Kuravanpalam Road. The entrance to the Super Speciality Hospital is
through the said road. The rights of the petitioners for a peaceful and calm
atmosphere inside the hospital premises, as well as the striking workers for
an appropriate venue to air their grievances, can be safeguarded if the
agitating workers remove themselves from the inside of the hospital premises
and set up their shed by the side of the Kuravanpalom Road without causing
any inconvenience to the neighbours and without blocking the entrance to
the hospital. Sri Rajendran Nair, the learned counsel appearing for the Union
submitted that the workers are bent on continuing with the agitation in a
peaceful manner but it was submitted that they should be permitted to sit by
the side of the National Highway 744. This suggestion is seriously opposed by
the State Attorney on the ground that the highway is narrow and would
impede the peaceful movement of vehicles.
In that view of the matter, the following directions are issued.
a) The respondents 6 to 13 shall remove themselves and
the shed that they have put up inside the hospital premises and
relocate themselves by the side of the Kuravanpalam road
without causing any obstruction to the traffic, the neighbouring
residents and without preventing access to the Sanker's Institute
of Medical Sciences.
b) The petitioners shall fully cooperate with the conciliation
proceedings pending before the 5th respondent and take all
earnest efforts to settle the disputes amicably.
c) The respondents 2 and 3 shall ensure that law and
order is maintained and no obstruction is caused to the peaceful
running of the hospital by the party respondents. The party
respondents shall not obstruct or intimidate any of the willing
employees, para medical staff, doctors, patients and visitors.
This writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE
ps
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE IN FORM -P DATED
10.12.2020 UNDER CLAUSE 'C' OF SECTION
25F OF INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT WAS ISSUED
TO 1ST RESPONDENT WITH COPIES TO
RESPONDENTS 4 AND 5.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE PUBLISHED BY THE
PETITIONERS IN THE NOTICE BOARD ON
10.12.2020 ABOUT THE DECISION OF
RETRENCHMENT.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF LIST OF RETRENCHED
EMPLOYEES, CONTAINING THE DETAILS OF
RETRENCHMENT COMPENSATION, SALARY IN LIEU
OF ONE MONTH NOTICE AND GRATUITY PAYABLE.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 10.12.2020
ISSUED TO THE 9TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE
RETRENCHED EMPLOYEES AND UNION LEADERS
SQUATTING INSIDE THE HOSPITAL.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED
11.12.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST
PETITIONER TO THE THE 2ND RESPONDENT WITH
COPY TO 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 (a) TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE
RESPONDENT NO.2 ACKNOWLEDGING EXHIBIT P6
REPRESENTATION.
EXHIBIT P6 (b) TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE
RESPONDENT NO.3 ACKNOWLEDGING EXHIBIT P6
REPRESENTATION.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT R10(a) TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO ISSUED BY SREE
NARAYANA TRUST MEDICAL MISSION DATED
7.5.1992.
EXHIBIT R10(b) TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING OF SREE
NARAYANA TRUST MEDICAL MISSION DATED
24.10.2020.
EXHIBIT R10(c) TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
23.12.2020 SENT BY PETITIONERS/ADDITIONAL
RESPONDENTS 10 TO 13 SOUGHT TO BE
IMPLEADED TO THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER,
KOLLAM.
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE
