Kerala High Court
Devanand Pandey vs The Assistant Labour Officer on 21 October, 2025
2025:KER:78144
WP(C) NO. 20375 OF 2025 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 / 29TH ASWINA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 20375 OF 2025
PETITIONER/S:
1 DEVANAND PANDEY, AGED 26 YEARS
S/O.LALJEE PANDEY MUJOULI CHANDROW GORAKHPUR
UTTARPRADESH, PIN - 273209
2 PAWAN, AGED 33 YEARS
S/O.LALJEE PANDEY MUJOULI CHANDROW GORAKHPUR
UTTARPRADESH, PIN - 273209
3 DEEPCHAND, AGED 38 YEARS
S/O.BACHOO YADAV JANGAL KHURD (KHORISNGHA) POST
UTHRAVAL BAGHAULI SANT KABIR NAGAR KHALILABAD
UTTARPRADESH, PIN - 272175
4 LAHURI RAM GUPTA , AGED 50 YEARS
S/O.PARAS GUPTA 132 GRAM MUJAULI POST CHANDRAW MUJAULI
GORAKPUR UTTARPRADESH, PIN - 273209
5 SIMON ARACKAL , AGED 66 YEARS
S/O.A.C.JOHN PROPRIETOR CARMEL AGENCIES ARACKAL HOUSE
NORTH JANATHA ROAD PALARIVATTOM KOCHI, PIN - 682025
BY ADVS.
SRI.MATHEW SKARIA
SRI.JOY JOSEPH (MUNDACKAL)
SRI.THOMAS MATHEW (KOPPARA)
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER
ERNAKULAM 1ST CIRCLE ERNAKULAM KOCHI, PIN - 682030
2025:KER:78144
WP(C) NO. 20375 OF 2025 2
2 THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER ERNAKULAM
KAKKANAD KOCHI, PIN - 682030
3 THE CHAIRMAN
KERALA HEADLOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD
DISTRICT OFFICE KUMMENCHERY BUILDING T D ROAD
ERNAKULAM KOCHI, PIN - 682035
BY ADV SHRI.S.KRISHNA MOORTHY, SC, KERALA HEADLOAD
WORKERS WELFARE BOARD - KHWWB
SRI. V. K. SUNIL, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
21.10.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:78144
WP(C) NO. 20375 OF 2025 3
JUDGMENT
This writ petition has been filed challenging Exhibit
P12 order of the Appellate Authority under Rule 26C of the
Kerala Headload Workers Rules, 1981 (hereinafter referred to
as 'the Rules'), rejecting the appeal filed against Exhibit P7
order. Through Exhibit P7 order, the Assistant Labour Officer
and Registering Authority, Ernakulam has rejected the
application filed by the petitioners for registration under
Kerala Head Load Workers Act, 1978 and the Rules,
principally on the ground that the registration of the
petitioners would cause loss of opportunity for the pool
workers and reduction in their income.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would
submit that, by Exhibit P11 judgment of this Court, the
Appellate Authority was directed to consider the appeal with
reference to the judgments of this Court, which according to
him, indicates that the reasoning adopted by the Original
Authority cannot be sustained in law. Learned counsel
appearing for the petitioners also points out that a reading of
Exhibit P12 order will show that the Appellate Authority has
disregarded the express directions issued by this Court in
2025:KER:78144
Exhibit P11 and has proceeded to decide the appeal, without
even referring to any of the judgments which were produced by
the petitioners before him.
3. Heard the learned Government Pleader and learned
counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent.
4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners, the learned Government Pleader and the learned
counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent, I am of the view that
there is considerable merit in the contention taken by the
learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that Exhibit P12
order was issued by the Appellate Authority without
considering the directions issued by this Court in Exhibit P11
judgment. This Court, in Exhibit P11 judgment directed thus:-
''4. Since Ext.P8 statutory appeal under Rule 26C
of the Kerala Headload Workers Rules is pending
consideration, there will be a direction to the 2nd
respondent to consider Ext.P8 and pass orders in
accordance with law, after hearing the petitioners and the
3rd respondent and after referring to the precedents of this
Court and the relevant statutory provisions. A decision on
Ex.P8 shall be taken as expeditiously as possible, at any
rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt
of a copy of this judgment. It will be open to the petitioners
to produce a compilation of decisions of this Court on the
subject before the 2nd respondent.''
Since I am convinced that Exhibit P12 order has been issued by
2025:KER:78144
the Appellate Authority without having regard to the directions
issued by this Court in Exhibit P11 judgment and in order to
provide another opportunity to the Appellate Authority to pass
an order strictly in terms of the directions contained in Exhibit
P11 judgment, Exhibit P12 order is to be set aside.
Accordingly, Exhibit P12 order is set aside. The
appeal filed by the petitioners (Exhibit P8) shall stand restored
to the file of the Appellate Authority (the 2 nd respondent), who
shall pass fresh orders, after providing a fresh opportunity of
hearing to the petitioners , within a period of six weeks from
the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. I make
it clear that while disposing of the appeal, the 2 nd respondent
shall keep in mind the directions issued by this Court in Exhibit
P11 judgment and shall strictly abide by the directions issued
by this Court in Exhibit P11 judgment.
The writ petition ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
ajt
2025:KER:78144
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20375/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 14-10-2024
IN FORM NO.IX SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER
DEVANAND PANDEY, S/O.LALJEE PANDEY, BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 14-10-2024
IN FORM NO.IX SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER
PAWAN, S/O.LALJEE PANDEY, BEFORE THE 1ST
RESPONDENT ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 14/10/2024
IN FORM NO.IX SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER
DEEPCHAND, S/O.BACHOO YADAV, BEFORE THE 1ST
RESPONDENT ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 14-10-2024
IN FORM NO.IX SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH PETITIONER
LAHURI RAM GUPTA, S/O.PARAS GUPTA, BEFORE THE
1ST RESPONDENT ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED
SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH PETITIONER, SIMON
ARACKAL, BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM X NOTICE DATED
23/10/2024 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO
THE PETITIONERS AND TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.HL-1125/2024 DATED
27/01/2025 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 30/01/2025
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS 1 TO 4 BEFORE
THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE NO.H-574/2025 DATED 17-
02-2025 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE
PETITIONERS AND RESPONDENTS 1 AND 3
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT
NO.KHWWB/EKM/52/2025 E C2 DATED 25-02-2025
SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE
2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 13-03-2025 IN
W.P.(C) NO.9160/2025, OF THIS HON'BLE COURT
Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.H-574/2025 DATED
18/03/2025 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN EXT.P8
APPEAL
2025:KER:78144
Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT DATED 23-09-2024 IN W.P.(C)
