Pradeep Kumar K. R vs The Assistant Labour Officer
2022 Latest Caselaw 625 Ker

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
     THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
 FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 24TH POUSHA, 1943
                     WP(C) NO. 1353 OF 2022
PETITIONER/S:

            PRADEEP KUMAR K. R.
            AGED 51 YEARS
            S/O RAMACHANDRAN .K.K, PROPRIETOR,
            A.P.S.ENATERPRISES, 36/48 G, THANNERPANTHAL,
            VENGERI POST, KOZHIKODE-673 610, PIN - 673610

            BY ADVS.
            R.SUDHISH
            M.MANJU



RESPONDENT/S:

            THE ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER
            OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICE, FIRST
            CIRCLE, KOZHIKODE-673 020., PIN - 673020


OTHER PRESENT:

            ADV. SABEENA P ISMAIL-GP




     THIS     WRIT   PETITION     (CIVIL)    HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION    ON   14.01.2022,     THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP.(C) No. 1353 of 2022

                                  ..2..

               BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
     -----------------------------------------
               WP.(C) No. 1353 of 2022
      ----------------------------------------
       Dated this the 14th day of January, 2022




                                JUDGMENT

Employees of the petitioner have preferred

applications for registration as head load

workers under Rule 26A of the Kerala Head Load

Workers Rules, 1981, before the respondent.

Copies of the said applications have been

produced as Exts.P2 to P5.

2. I have perused the applications. It is seen

that Exts.P2 to P4 applications are dated

10.11.2021 and Ext.P5 is dated 29.11.2021. In

spite of the lapse of more than six weeks, no

orders have been issued thereon by the

statutory authority.

3. Having regard to the circumstances mentioned

above and on the basis of the submission made WP.(C) No. 1353 of 2022

..3..

by the learned counsel for the petitioner as

well as the learned Government Pleader, I am

of the view that the writ petition can be

disposed of with a direction to the respondent

to consider and pass appropriate orders on

Exts.P2 to P5 applications in a time bound

manner.

4. Accordingly, respondent is directed to

consider and pass appropriate orders on

Exts.P2 to P5 applications filed by the

employees of the petitioner within a period of

two months from the date of receipt of a copy

of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner

as well as the applicants and other stake

holders, if any.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

JUDGE Bka/14.01.2022 WP.(C) No. 1353 of 2022

..4..

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1353/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 COPY OF THE TRADE LICENCE ISSUED BY THE KOZHIKODE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION TO THE PETITIONER

Exhibit P2 COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE HEAD LOAD WORKERS OF THE PETITIONER IKRAMUL HUSSAIN DATED 10.11.2011.

Exhibit P3 COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE HEAD LOAD WORKERS OF THE PETITIONER JAYAKRISHNA MANDAL DATED 10.11.2011.

Exhibit P4 COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE HEAD LOAD WORKERS OF THE PETITIONER PRASAD A. DATED 10.11.2011.

Exhibit P5 COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE HEAD LOAD WORKERS OF THE PETITIONER SASIDHARAN M. DATED 10.11.2011.

Exhibit P6 COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT DATED 30.11.2011.