Kerala High Court
Kerala State Road Transport ... vs Kerala State Road Transport Employees' ... on 22 April, 2025
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
2025:KER:32972
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. V. BALAKRISHNAN
TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 2ND VAISAKHA, 1947
WA NO. 826 OF 2025
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.04.2025 IN WP(C) NO.16443/2025
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS/APPELLANT & 3RD PARTY IN WA:
1 KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION WORKERS
FEDERATION, REG. NO. 283/71, NANTHANCODE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT - 695 003,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, S. SEETHILAL,
AGED 60 YEARS, S/O. SUKUMARAN, RESIDING AT
KANDATHIL HOUSE, KAROOR, AMBALAPUZHA.P.O.,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 695003
2 DEEP D. ANAND, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.DAYANANDAN D,
RESIDING AT VELLOOPARAMBIL, KARUVATTA P.O.,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PINCODE, PIN - 690517
BY ADVS.
LIJU.V.STEPHEN
INDU SUSAN JACOB
TAJ K. TOM
ABHIJITH U.
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS & RESPONDENTS IN WPC:
1 KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT EMPLOYEES' WELFARE
ASSOCIATION, (REG.NO. 03/03/2015) PANCHAVADI
BUILDING, MAYATHARA.P.O., CERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA
DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY,
V.V. HARIDAS, RESIDING AT ABMATTUVAYALIL,
VALLICHIRA.P.O., PALA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.,
PIN - 686574
2 MEHABOOB.M.K, S/O. C.K. KHADER, DRIVER - GRADE
- I, THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
2025:KER:32972
WA 826/25 & 827/25
2
CORPORATION, ALUVA DEPOT, ERNAKULUM DISTRICT,
SECRETARY, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
EMPLOYEES' WELFARE ASSOCIATION, PANCHAVADI
BUILDING, MAYATHARA. P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA
DISTRICT., RESIDING AT CHETHRAPPILLYPPARAMBIL,
RAMAM, MUPPATHADAM.P.O., ALUVA, ERNAKUALM
DISTRICT, PIN - 683110
3 RAJESH C.R., S/O. RAGHAVAN PILLAI, DRIVER
GRADE - II, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
CORPORATION, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANATHAPURAM
DISTRICT, CHANIYIL, POOCHACKAL.P.O.,
CHERTHALA, ALAPUZHA DISTRICT,, PIN - 688526
4 THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,,
PIN - 695001
5 THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUV ANANTHAPURAM.,
PIN - 695001
6 THE RETURNING OFFICER & ADDITIONAL LABOUR
COMMISSIONER (IR), CIVIL STATION, THOZHIL
BHAVAN, VIKASBHAVAN P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695033
BY ADVS.
SRI DEEPU THANKAN-SC
SRI O D SIVADAS
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.04.2025 ALONG WITH W.A.NO.827/2025, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:32972
WA 826/25 & 827/25
3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. V. BALAKRISHNAN
TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 2ND VAISAKHA, 1947
WA NO. 827 OF 2025
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.04.2025 IN WP(C) NO.16443/2025
APPELLANTS/THIRD PARTY:
1 SREEJITH P J, AGED 46 YEARS
S/O JANARDHANAN NAIR, PUTHUSSERIL HOUSE,
CHANGALAM SOUTH PO, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686022
2 SEBASTIAN A G, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O GEORGE,
ARASSAR KADAVIL HOUSE, KATTOOR PO, KALAVOOR,
ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688522
3 SUNOJ PS, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O SUKUMARAN PG,
PATHUCHIRAYIL (H), PULIKKATTUSSERIL (H),
KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686015
4 SATHEESH CHANDRAN MOHAN, AGED 55 YEARS
S/O BHASKARA MENON, MAMBARAMBIL HOUSE,
VELOOR PO, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686003
BY ADVS.
K.S.ARUN KUMAR
RAJI T.BHASKAR
AMRUTHA K P
AMRUTHA P S
VIJAY SANKAR V.H.
JERIN JOSEPH
DEVARAJ SUBRAMANIAN
LAKSHMI T.R.
ASWATHY B. KRISHNA
AMRUTHA P.S.
2025:KER:32972
WA 826/25 & 827/25
4
RESPONDENTS/WRIT PETITIONERS 1 TO 3/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3:
1 KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT EMPLOYEES' WELFARE
ASSOCIATION, (REG.NO. 03/03/2015) PANCHAVADI
BUILDING, MAYATHARA.P.O., CERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA
DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY,
V.V. HARIDAS, RESIDING AT ABMATTUVAYALIL,
VALLICHIRA.P.O., PALAI, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 686574
2 MEHABOOB.M.K., AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. C.K. KHADER,
DRIVER - GRADE - I, THE KERALA STATE ROAD
TRANSPORT CORPORATION, ALUVA DEPOT, ERNAKULUM
DISTRICT, SECRETARY, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
EMPLOYEES' WELFARE ASSOCIATION, PANCHAVADI
BUILDING, MAYATHARA. P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA
DISTRICT.,RESIDING AT CHETHRAPPILLY
PPARAMBIL,ERAMAM, MUPPATHADAM.P.O., ALUVA,
ERNAKUALM DISTRICT, PIN - 683110
3 RAJESH.C.R., AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. RAGHAVAN
PILLAI, AGED 50 YEARS, DRIVER GRADE - II,
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
ATTINGAL, THIRUVANATHAPURAM DISTRICT,
CHANIYIL, POOCHACKAL.P.O., CHERTHALA,
ALAPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688526
4 THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
PIN - 695001
5 THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695001
6 THE RETURNING OFFICER & ADDITIONAL LABOUR
COMMISSIONER, (I.R), CIVIL STATION,KAKKANADU,
ERNAKULAM *THOZHIL BHAVAN (LABOUR COMPLEX),
PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033
(ADDRESS OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT IS CORRECTED AS
PER THE ORDER DATED 16.04.2025 IN I.A.1/2025,
PIN - 682030
2025:KER:32972
WA 826/25 & 827/25
5
BY ADVS.
SRI DEEPU THANKAN - SC
SRI O D SIVADAS
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.04.2025, ALONG WITH W.A.NO.826/2025, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:32972
WA 826/25 & 827/25
6
JUDGMENT
Devan Ramachandran, J.
The Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (for short,
KSRTC) notified a referendum in their services and approached
the competent Authority of the Labour Department to conduct it
leading to the publication of a draft voters list by them.
2. The above list was challenged by certain persons
before this Court through WP(C) No.15262/2025, which was
disposed of through judgment dated 10/4/2025, with the
following observations and directions:-
"If the name of the workman is left out from
the draft voter's list prepared by the Returning Officer, he
can make individual objection before the Returning Officer
within the time stipulated in the election notification. If the
members of the petitioner Union are aggrieved by the draft
voters' list published, they are free to submit objection
before the Returning Officer within the time provided in
the election notification.
Leaving open the said right and without
prejudice to the contentions of the petitioner in the writ
petition, the writ petition is disposed of."
3. In obedience to the directions and adverting to the
2025:KER:32972
WA 826/25 & 827/25
objections of certain individuals the Returning Officer - who is of
the rank of Deputy Additional Labour Commissioner - issued
Ext.P5 order, directing that all 'Badali' Workers (Substitute
Workers), who have completed 120 days of service within a
period of one year prior to the date of notification, be also
included in the Final Voters List.
4. It transpires that the KSRTC, in ostensible
compliance with Ext.P5, produced a Voters List before the
Returning Officer, but without including any 'Badali' Workers.
5. This caused the Returning Officer to issue Ext.P8
order, recording that since the KSRTC did not comply with his
earlier order, the conduct of the referendum becomes
untenable, particularly since they have offered no valid Final
Voters List in in terms of law.
6. The aforesaid two orders, namely Exts.P5 and P8,
were challenged by the Kerala State Road Transport Employees
Welfare Association and others, filing WP(C) No.16443/2025; and,
2025:KER:32972
WA 826/25 & 827/25
in it, a learned Judge of this Court issued the impugned order.
7. Since the above cited Appeals carry challenge against
the same order, we propose to dispose them of jointly through
this judgment.
8. Vide the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has
stayed Ext.P8 order and has directed the Returning Officer to
publish the Voters' List, including only regular employees of the
KSRTC and not the 'Badali' Workers.
9. The learned counsel for the appellants in these cases,
namely Sri.Liju V. Stephen in W.A.826/2025; and Sri.K.S.Arun
Kumar in W.A.No.827/2025, argued that the impugned order
effectively allows the Writ Petition itself, since the main prayer
therein has been now granted through an interim order, which is
impermissible in law. They argued that, when the Returning
Officer issued Ext.P5 order, it was fully accepted and complied
with by the KSRTC, producing a Final Voters' List before him,
however, in blatant contravention of his directions therein; and
2025:KER:32972
WA 826/25 & 827/25
hence, that he had no other option, but to issue Ext.P8. They
contended that, when the learned Single Judge stayed Ext.P8
order at the stage of admission of the Writ Petition and allowed
the referendum to continue based on the Final Voters' List
prepared by the KSRTC in violation of Ext.P5 order, nothing
would remain for consideration in the Writ Petition, since all the
reliefs sought for therein has been granted. They thus prayed that
these Appeals be allowed.
10. However, in refutation, Sri.Deepu Thankan - learned
Standing Counsel for the KSRTC, submitted that Ext.P5 is an
illegal order; but, in the same breath conceded that his client
had complied with the same, producing the Final Voters' List
before the Returning Officer. He explained that, to his
instructions as of now, there are no 'Badali' Workers who are
eligible to vote as per the directions of the Returning Officer in
Ext.P5; and that, even if there are any, they are not entitled to
be included in the Voters' List since they are not part of the
2025:KER:32972
WA 826/25 & 827/25
regular establishment.
11. Hearing Sri.Deepu Thankan as above, we posed a
pointed question to him whether his client accepts Ext.P5, to
which, he said they do not, but admitted that they did not
challenge it. Incredulously, the learned Standing Counsel then
offered an explanation for his client in not having assailed
Ext.P5, saying that they were under the impression that they
would be justified in filing a Final Voters' List before the
Returning Officer containing names of persons who they reckon
to be entitled to such inclusion, notwithstanding the directions in
Ext.P5.
12. Sri.O.D.Sivadas - learned counsel for the writ
petitioner, supported the submissions of Sri.Deepu Thankan and
argued that, since Exts.P5 and P8 are illegal orders, the learned
Single Judge was fully justified in having stayed the latter, thus
permitting the referendum based on the Voters' List prepared by
the KSRTC. He contended that, as rightly argued by Sri.Deepu
2025:KER:32972
WA 826/25 & 827/25
Thankan, 'Badali' Workers are not entitled to be included in the
Voters' List; and hence that the stipulation of the Returning
Officer in Ext.P5 - that those 'Badali' Workers who have
completed 120 days in a period of one year prior to the
notification, ought to be so - is wholly untenable and contrary
to law.
13. The afore rival submissions being recorded, we have
examined the impugned order very intently.
14. As rightly argued by the appellants, the learned Single
Judge has stayed Ext.P8 and has directed the Returning Officer
to publish the Voters' List, which was admittedly prepared by
the KSRTC disregarding the directions in Ext.P5. Interestingly, the
learned Single Judge has not stayed Ext.P5 and this is crucial
because, the KSRTC maintains that they have complied with it,
when they filed the Final Voters' List before the Returning
Officer, albeit without including any 'Badali' Workers.
15. Therefore, there is some force in the submissions of
2025:KER:32972
WA 826/25 & 827/25
the appellants that, through the interim order now granted, the
learned Single Judge has virtually allowed the Writ Petition. This
is because, if the referendum is now conducted based on the
Voters' List stated to have been prepared by the KSRTC without
complying with the directions in Ext.P5, then nothing remains to
be considered on its merits in the Writ Petition, when it is to be
heard later.
16. As matters now stand, the undisputed factual scenario
is that the KSRTC asserts that they have complied with Ext.P5,
but still maintains that the said order is illegal. Sri.O.D.Sivadas
adopts a similar approach, but contending that both Exts.P5 and
P8 are wrong and hence that neither could the Returning Officer
have ordered the inclusion of the 'Badali' Workers in the Final
Voters' List, nor could he have deferred the conduct of
referendum.
17. However, it must be borne in mind that the first order
of the Returning Officer, namely Ext.P5, was consequent to a
2025:KER:32972
WA 826/25 & 827/25
judgment of this Court in WP(C)No.15262/2025, against which,
nobody moved Appeal. When the Returning Officer was directed
to consider the objections of the 'Badali' Workers; and when he
acceded to some of them - thus directing the KSRTC to act in
the manner as ordered in Ext.P5 - and when the latter did not
choose to challenge it, but still preferred a Final Voters' List in
derogation thereof, obviously, the Returning Officer was placed
in a quandary, though we do not say that his actions reflected in
Ext.P8 are right or wrong.
18. Suffice to say, all these aspects are to be considered
by the learned Single Judge while the Writ Petition is finally
decided. An interim order of the nature now impugned could not
have been issued since, for the reasons above, particularly when
we find force in the submission that it amounts to virtually
allowing the Writ Petition itself.
In the afore circumstances, we allow these Appeals and set
aside the impugned order; however, clarifying that none of our
2025:KER:32972
WA 826/25 & 827/25
observations can be construed to be an affirmative
opinion/declaration on any of the relevant issues, including on
the validity of Exts.P5 and P8 and that they are intended only
for the purpose of this judgment.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
Sd/-
P. V. BALAKRISHNAN
JUDGE
RR
