Shyama Rajagopal vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 18769 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                           PRESENT

        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 18TH BHADRA, 1943

                    WP(C) NO. 3917 OF 2021

PETITIONER:

          SHYAMA RAJAGOPAL
          A4, LOTUS PADMAHARA,
          SRI. RAGHAVENDRA MADOM LANE, INSIDE FORT,
          TRIPUNITHURA,
          KOCHI-682 301.
          BY ADVS.
          SRI.P.NANDAKUMAR
          SMT.AMRUTHA SANJEEV


RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO
          GOVERNMENT,
          LABOUR AND SKILLS DEPARTMENT,
          GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
    2     THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER
          CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD,
          KOCHI-682 030.
    3     THE PUBLISHING PRIVATE LIMITED (THE HINDU GROUP)
          KASTHURI BUILDINGS,
          859 AND 860 ANNA SALAI,
          CHENNAI-600 002
          REPRESENTED BY TIS DIRECTOR.
 WPC No.3917/21                      -:2:-



             SMT.SABEENA P.ISMAIL, GOVT. PLEADER



      THIS       WRIT   PETITION    (CIVIL)    HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION        ON   09.09.2021,   THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WPC No.3917/21                       -:3:-




                     BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
                      ----------------------------------------
                         W.P.(C) No.3917 of 2021
                      ----------------------------------------
                 Dated this the 9th day of September, 2021

                                JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to respondents 1

and 2 to initiate conciliation proceedings in the matter of dispute

raised by the petitioner with the 3rd respondent.

2. It is seen from Ext.P1 that petitioner has initiated the

jurisdiction of the 2nd respondent on 21.8.2020. However since the

proceedings did not continue as expected by the petitioner, he has

filed this writ petition seeking directions to initiate and complete the

proceedings. It is contended by the petitioner that, in the meantime,

petitioner was informed by the 2nd respondent that since petitioner

filed the writ proceedings under Article 226, the 2 nd respondent

assumed that it is not proper to continue the conciliation proceedings

further.

3. Even though notice was issued to the 3 rd respondent and

service has been completed, there is no appearance for the 3 rd

respondent.

4. In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of

directing the 2nd respondent to proceed in accordance with law

pursuant to the dispute raised by the petitioner as evidenced by

Ext.P1, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of

three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If

the proceedings for conciliation end in a failure, consequent actions

shall also be initiated without delay.

Sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE vps

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3917/2021

PETITIONER'S/S' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 21.8.2020 SUBMITTED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT ALONG WITH THE POSTAL RECEIPT.

Exhibit P2         TRUE COPY OF      LETTER DATED 12.07.2021
                   SENT BY THE       2ND RESPONDENT TO THE
                   PETITIONER.
Exhibit P2(a)      TRANSLATION OF LETTER DATED 12.07.2021
                   SENT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE
                   PETITIONER.