Kerala High Court
Kerala Vyapari Vyavasayi Ekopana ... vs Chumattu Thozhilali Union (Citu) on 4 March, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 13TH PHALGUNA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 5415 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
KERALA VYAPARI VYAVASAYI EKOPANA SAMITHI,
THRISSUR DISTRICT COMMITTEE, REG. NO.262/81,
SAHITHYA ACADEMI ROAD, VYAPARA BHAVAN, THRISSUR-680 020,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY V.T.GEORGE.
BY ADVS.
P.RAMAKRISHNAN
PREETHI RAMAKRISHNAN (P-212)
T.C.KRISHNA
C.ANIL KUMAR
ASHA K.SHENOY
PRATAP ABRAHAM VARGHESE
RESPONDENTS:
1 CHUMATTU THOZHILALI UNION (CITU),
MACHINGAL LANE, THRISSUR-680 020, THRISSUR,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2 CHIMATTU THOZHILALI UNION(BMS), THIRUVAMBADY,
PATTURAIKKAL, THRISSUR-680 022,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
3 CHUMATTUTHOZHILALI UNION(INTUC),
THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
KURUPPAM ROAD, THRISSUR-680 001.
4 THRISSUR CHUMATTUTHOZHILALI UNIION (AITUC),
MANNADIAR LANE, THRISSUR-680 001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
5 KERALA HEADLOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,
THRISSUR DISTRICT COMMITTEE, JAIHIND MARKET BUILDING,
THRISSUR-680 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN.
WP(C) No.5415/2022 2
6 DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, THRISSUR,
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICE,
THRISSUR-680 003.
7 THE DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER, THRISSUR-
680 003.
BY ADVS.
V.P.PRASAD
SRI.S.KRISHNA MOORTHY, SC, KHWWB
SRI.JUSTINE JACOB-SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 04.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No.5415/2022 3
JUDGMENT
Ext.P3 dated 15.12.2021 of the District Labour Officer and
Ext.P14 of the Appellate Authority constituted under the Headload
Workers Welfare Act dated 20.1.2022 have been assailed on behalf
of the petitioner. The petitioner is the registered association of
traders and merchants falling in Thrissur District whereas
respondents Nos.1 to 4 are the trade unions representing loading
and unloading workers employed under the 5 th respondent i.e.,
Kerala Head Load Workers Welfare Board, Thrissur. The rate of
wages payable for loading and unloading works were fixed by the
5th respondent. In the year, 2018, there was a dispute with regard
to revision of loading and unloading charges between the petitioner
and respondent No.4. The matter was referred to the 6 th
respondent District Labour Officer and under the provisions of
Section 21(4) of the Headload Workers Act, 1978 (hereinafter
referred to as the 'Act'), increased the rates by 20% vide Ext.P1
order dated 30.6.2018. An appeal was preferred before the 7 th
respondent Labour Commissioner which was dismissed as per the
order dated 14.9.2018. The increase of wages at the rate of 20%
as per Ext.P1 was for the period from 15.6.2018 to 14.6.2020.
2. Respondents 1 to 4 again sought the revision of wages by
making an application; series of meetings were held and vide
Ext.P3 order dated 15.12.2021, wages were revised for the period
from 15.6.2020 to 14.6.2022. Keeping in view the trade recession
of covid, the wages of freight workers in the old municipal area
were revised by 17% to be effective only from 15.6.2021 by
clarifying that no arrears of wages on the revised rate shall be
levied. In appeal, the Appellate Authority vide Ext.P14 impugned
order dated 20.1.2022 changed the date of effectiveness of its
applicability instead of 15.6.2021 to 1.11.2021 to 30.1.2022 and
from 1.2.2022 to 30.6.2023, there has to be a further increase of
3%.
2. Sri.P.Ramakrishnan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioner, submits that the Appellate Authority in an appeal
preferred by the petitioner in the absence of any challenge by any
competent authority could not have enhanced the rates as noticed
above for a limited period, from 17% to 20%. The order Ext.P1
passed on 30.6.2018 was effective from 15.6.2018 to 14.6.2020
and at that time, there was no covid pandemic. As per Exts.P8 to
P12, the prevailing rates for loading and unloading charges in
different parts of Thrissur District were far lesser than the rates
fixed as per Ext.P3. The 7th respondent Deputy Labour
Commissioner acknowledged that the Thrissur market had
remained closed for a longer period on account of pandemic and
not only the workers had lost working days, the traders also had
considerable fall in their income. While exercising the powers of
the Appellate Authority under Section 21(6), the amount cannot be
increased for a period as noticed above.
3. On the other hand, Sri.S.Krishnamoorthy, learned Standing
Counsel representing the 5th respondent opposed the
aforementioned prayer and submitted that the orders are perfectly
legal and justifiable.
4. I have heard the counsel for the parties and appraised
the paper book.
5. I am of the view that the Appellate Authority could not
have increased the additional amount of 3% for the period from
1.2.2022 to 30.6.2023. The order revising the effective dates
instead of 15.6.2022, to 1.11.2021 to 30.6.2023, keeping in view
the closure of the market with effect from 1.2.2022 to 30.6.2023,
cannot be faulted with. As regards the imposition of 17% increase
viz.a.viz the other orders where there had been increase of 14% as
per Ext.P8, the orders were passed keeping in view the facts and
circumstances of that particular case of that particular area. It is a
matter on record that the covid pandemic had set in March 2020
and continued for a number of months, when the first wave was
little over, again erupted the second wave. The third wave
also erupted in December, 2021. On that account the effective
date in my view by the Appellate Authority is perfectly correct. The
increase in 17% viz. a viz. the other cases as claimed by the
petitioner to the extent of 14% in my view is justified as after
the lock down, the first expansion and the second expansion, the
business had reopened and attempts were reached to arrive at a
consensus at grass root level. In fact after the lock down, all the
sectors had reopened. The increase of 3% for a part of the total
period from 1.11.2021 to 30.6.2023 is not justifiable and is hereby
set aside.
With the aforementioned modification in Ext.P14 order, Writ
Petition stands partly allowed.
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL, JUDGE
csl
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5415/2022
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 30.06.2018
ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT WITH ENGLISH
TRANSLATION.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF STATEMENT DATED 15.12.2021
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
6TH RESPONDENT WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 15.12.2021
ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT WITH ENGLISH
TRANSLATION.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED
24.12.2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 7TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION DATED
24.12.2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 7TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT 07.01.2022 IN WPC
NO.540/2022.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF DOCUMENTS DATED
18.01.2022 PRODUCED BY THE PETITIONER
WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF SETTLEMENT DATED 18.01.2021
IN RESPECT OF HEADLOAD WORKERS ENGAGED IN
OLLUR RAILWAY GOODS SHED AND ITS PREMISES
WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF SETTLEMENT DATED 29.09.2021
IN RESPECT OF LOADING AND UNLOADED
CHARGES AT THRISSUR RAILWAY GOODS SHED
WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED
06.02.2021 ISSUED IN RESPECT OF LOADING
AND UNLOADING CHARGES IN NFSA GODOWNS IN
THE STATE WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF SETTLEMENT DATED 20.09.2019
IN RESPECT OF LOADING AND UNLOADING RATES
AT POOL 1 A KOTTAPPURAM WITH ENGLISH
TRANSLATION.
Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF SETTLEMENT DATED NIL IN
RESPECT OF LOADING AND UNLOADING CHARGES
IN IRINGALAKUDA MUNICIPALITY WITH ENGLISH
TRANSLATION.
Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF STATEMENT FILED BY THE
PETITIONER IN HA 5/2021 BEFORE THE 7TH
RESPONDENT ON 18.01.2022 WITH ENGLISH
TRANSLATION.
Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 20.01.2022
PASSED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT IN HA
05/2021 WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
