Mohammed Fazil K.A vs. Station House Officer
Original PDF →WP(C) NO. 9503 OF 2020 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUE AY, THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 12TH SRAVANA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 9503 OF 2020 PETITIONER/S: MOHAMMED FAZIL K.A AGED 33 YEARS S/O.K.K.ABDUL LATHEEF, KOONATHIL HOUSE, ENGILODI, OTTUPARA, KUMARANELLOOR.P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 590 BY ADVS. P.B.KRISHNAN SRI.SABU GEORGE RESPONDENT/S: 1 STATION HOUSE OFFICER (SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE), WADAKKANCHERY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR-680 582 2 CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, WADAKANCHERY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR-680 582 3 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR-KUNNAMKULAM RD, KUNNAMKULAM, KERALA-680 503 4 K.P.MADANAN, AGED 52 YEARS CITU LEADER, KELAMPILAKKAL, KUMARANELLOR P.O., THRISSUR-680 590 5 SALI, AGED 45 YEARS AITUC LEADER, KALARIPARAMBIL HOUSE, JARAMKUNNU, THRISSUR-680 007 6 MADHU AGED 45 YEARS BMS UNION LEADER,KUMARANELLOR P.O., THRISSUR-680
WP(C) NO. 9503 OF 2020 2 590 7 RAZAQ AGED 58 YEARS AITUC UNION LEADER, KUMARANELLOR P.O., THRISSUR-680 590 8 ADDL.R8. KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD HEAD OFFICE, SRM ROAD, ERNAKULAM NORTH, KALOOR, ERNAKULAM-682018, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 9 ADDL.R9. KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD, THRISSUR DISTRICT OFFICE, HAIHIND MARKET BUILDING,KURUPPAM, THEKKINKADU MAIDAN, THRISSUR- 680001, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. ADDL. RESPONDENTS 8 AND 9 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 6-7-2020 IN IA 1/2020). 10 ADDL.R10. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, SOUHRUDA ARCHADE, NEAR TALUK OFFICE, WADAKKANCHERRY,THRISSUR, PIN-680582. (ADDL.RESPONDENT NO. 10 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 01-10-2020 IN WP(C). BY ADVS. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.GEORGE MATHEW SRI.S.KRISHNA MOORTHY, SC, KHWWB SHRI.PRAVEEN S. SRI.M.D.SASIKUMARAN SHRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G SRI.DIPU JAMES SHRI.MATHEW K.T. SHRI.GEORGE K.V. OTHER PRESENT: SMT.REKHA.C.NAIR, SR.GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 9503 OF 2020 3 P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.9503 of 2020 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of August, 2021 JUDGMENT The above writ petition is filed with following prayers : i) Issue a Writ of mandamus or any other writ order or direction in the nature thereof directing Respondent No.1 to 3 to afford adequate protection to the petitioner, his workers and drivers to do the loading and unloading works in the godown situated in Re.Sy.No.54/35 and 8/16 of Kumaranelloor village and to transport the same without obstruction from Respondents 4 to 7, its members or agents; ii) grant the petitioner such other appropriate relief that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper; AND iii) award the petitioner the costs of this Writ Petition.
The short facts are like this : The petitioner is a partner of a firm engaged in the business of supply of essential commodities to Supplyco and Consumerfed. The godown of the petitioner is situated in re-survey No. 54/25 and 8/16 of Kumaranelloor Village. According to the
WP(C) NO. 9503 OF 2020 4 petitioner, he is having his own head load workers registered under the Kerala Headload Workers Act, 1978 for doing loading and unloading works in his godown. It is the case of the petitioner that the contesting respondents are creating trouble and hence, this police protection petition is filed. According to the petitioner, the area where the godown is situated, is not an area, where the Kerala Head Load Workers (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Scheme, 1983 (for short ‘the scheme’) is implemented. Hence, the petitioner contended that he has got right to engage his own workers. The respondent Nos.4 to 7 filed a detailed counter affidavit, disputing the facts in the writ petition. The additional respondent Nos. 8 and 9 also filed a counter.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 5 to 7 and the learned counsel for additional respondent Nos. 8 and 9. I also heard the learned Government Pleader.
The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated his contentions in the writ petition. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is not a scheme implemented area and
WP(C) NO. 9503 OF 2020 5 therefore, the petitioner has got a right to engage his own employees. The counsel submitted that this Court passed an interim order on 24.4.2020 and this Court may kindly retain that order and dispose the petition.
The learned counsel for respondent Nos. 4 to 7 raised several contentions. The counsel relied paragraph 4 of the counter filed by respondent Nos. 4 to 7, which is extracted hereunder. “With regard to the averments contained in paragraph 2 of the writ petition it is submitted that the petitioner is having his own head-load workers registered under the Head Load Workers Act 1978 and Rules framed thereunder is also wrong. The workers mentioned in Exts.P3 to P8 are attached to shop functioning from Door No.3/805 of Wadakanchery Municipality. Exts.P3 to P8 produced pertains to another shop along with godown owned by petitioner/firm. Exts.P3 to P8 is also not produced in full. The subject place is at Sarithapuram which is nearly 5 kilometers away from the address mentioned in Exts.P3 to P8. A perusal of Exts.P3 to P8 further reveals that most them are migrant workers and the two who are natives are not actually head load workers as contended by petitioner. These respondents are registered head load workers registered with trade unions and are working in the area where the petitioner is hving the godown where he is employing nearly 80 workers. The entire work inside the godown of loading and unloading is being done by those workers and the persons mentioned in Ext P3 to P8 are registered and employed at Ottupara where the petitioner is having shop and godown.Two of them are salesman attached to that shop.Falsity in the case is revealed from the fact that Exts P3 to P8 is of the year 2018 and the subject godown started functioning only recently, the date which is willfully suppressed. This itself reveals the fact that shop/godown mention in Ext P1 and Exts P3 to P8 are different from the one at Sarithapuram.”
WP(C) NO. 9503 OF 2020 6
The learned counsel for the contesting respondents submitted that there is no pleading in the writ petition to the effect that it is a scheme implemented area. The counsel submitted that the identity cards produced by the petitioner as evident by Exts.P3 to P8 are issued in the year 2018 and the godown itself was started only in 2020. That itself shows the falsity of the case of the petitioner, the counsel submitted. The counsel for the contesting respondents submitted that this is the livelihood of the members of respondent Nos. 4 to 7. The counsel submitted that the petitioner is trying to deny the work to these poor head load workers.
The learned counsel for respondent Nos. 8 and 9 submitted based on the affidavit filed by the 8th respondent that the functional operation of the Kerala Head Load Workers (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Scheme is not implemented in Kumaranelloor Village. The Government Pleader submitted that if there is any law and order problem, the Police will do the needful.
When this writ petition came up for consideration
WP(C) NO. 9503 OF 2020 7 earlier, this Court passed an order on 24.4.2020, which is extracted hereunder: "Learned Government Pleader takes notice for respondents 1 to 3. Petitioner to take out notice by e-mail to respondents 4 to 7. In the meanwhile, there will be an interim direction to respondents 1 to 3 to give adequate police protection to the petitioner to carry out his loading-unloading activities engaging registered headload workers attached to the petitioner's establishment. Post on 25.5.2020"
The short point to be decided is whether the petitioner can engage his own registered workers based on Exts. P3 to P8 identity cards issued by the statutory authorities. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is not a scheme implemented area. It is true that there is a contention to the contesting respondent that it is not pleaded in the writ petition. But, the 8th respondent filed a counter affidavit. Paragraph 2 of the counter affidavit of the 8th respondent is extracted hereunder :
“2. It is most humbly submitted that functional operation of the Kerala Headload Workers (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Scheme 1983 is not implemented in Kumaranallor village wherein the petitioner's godown is situated.The respondents 4 to 7 are not registered under paragraph 6A of the scheme. So they are not registered workers under the eighth respondent.”
WP(C) NO. 9503 OF 2020 8
In the light of the above fact, it is clear that the area where the petitioner’s godown is situated is not a place, where the functional operation of the scheme is implemented. In such circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to engage his own employees. Admittedly, the petitioner is having his own employees with identity cards issued by the authorities concerned as evident by Exts.P3 to P8. In such circumstances, I am not in a position to reject the prayers in this writ petition. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed, retaining the interim order dated 24.4.2020 with following further directions : 1) If there is any law and order problem, the petitioner is free to approach the Station House Officer concerned with a representation. 2) If such a representation is received, the Station House Officer will do the needful in the light of the order dated 24.4.2020 passed by this Court. 3) I make it clear that the petitioner shall engage only his
WP(C) NO. 9503 OF 2020 9 registered workers covered by Exts.P3 to P8 identity cards, for loading and unloading works. 4) The petitioner will consider the request of respondent No. 4 to 7 sympathetically, if there is any additional work. P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE SKS
WP(C) NO. 9503 OF 2020 10 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9503/2020 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 AOF GST REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATED 19.04.2020 EXHIBIT P2 AOF THE AGREEMENT DATED 09.03.2020 WITH THE KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION EXHIBIT P3 AOF THE IDENTITY CARD OF RAVI .K.R. ONE OF THE EMPLOYEES OF THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P4 AOF THE IDENTITY CARD OF SUNIL A, ONE OF THE EMPLOYEES OF THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P5 AOF THE IDENTITY CARD OF MUSTAFFA HUSSAIAN, ON THE EMPLOYEES OF THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P6 AOF THE IDENTITY CARD OF R.ISLAM ONE OF THE EMPLOYEES OF THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P7 AOF THE IDENTITY CARD OF OMAR FAROOQ, ONE THE EMPLOYEES OF THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P8 AOF THE IDENTITY CARD OF ABU HANEEFA, ONE THE EMPLOYEES OF THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P9 AOF THE COMPLAINT DATED 17.04.2020 FILED BEFORE THE RESPONDENT NO.2 ALONG WITH THE RECEIPT EXHIBIT P10 AOF THE COMPLAINT DATED 18.04.2020 FILED BEFORE THE RESPONDENT NO.3 ALONG WITH THE RECEIPT EXHIBIT P11 AOF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATD 13.11.2018 ISSUED BY THE ALO WADAKKANCHERY EXHIBIT P12 AOF THE IDENTITY CARD OF R.ISLAM IN FULL EXHIBIT P13 AOF THE COPMPLAINT DATED 4.5.2020
WP(C) NO. 9503 OF 2020 11 FILED BY THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P14 AOF THE RECEIPT DATED 4.5.2020 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 EXHIBIT P15 AOF FIR NO.401/2020 DATED 4.5.2020 REGISTERED IN WADAKKANCHERRY POLICE STATION EXHIBIT P16 AOF GO (MS) NO.76/2017/LSGD DATED 31.3.2017 ISSUED BY THE LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT EXHIBIT P17 AOF THE EXTRACT OF BASIC TAX REGISTER OF RE SY.NOS.8,10,18,14,15 NOS 16 of KUMARANELLOOR VILLAGE EXHIBIT P18 AOF THE RESURVEY SKETCHES OF RE.SY.NOS.8,10,14,15,16 AND 18 OF KUMARANELLOOR VILLAGE EXHIBIT P19 AOF THE COMPLAINT DATED 27.4.2020 EXHIBIT P20 AOF REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE ASST.ENGINEER DATED 30.7.2020. RESPONDENT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R4(a):OF MINUTES OF TRAFFIC REGULATORY COMMITTEE OF VADAKKANCHERY MUNICIPALITY DATED 27/07/2020. EXT.R4(B)OF INFORMATION NO.R1-15406/2020 DTD 6.1.2021 RECEIVED FROM VADAKKANCHERY MUNICIPALITY
Reproduced from the public record of the Kerala High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.