The main legal point established is that the decision to merge pools and allocate work should be determined by the Committee under the Headload Workers Act, and the registration and induction of additional workers should be in accordance with the Act and its provisions.

S. Sankarasubban, J.

Petitioners in this Original Petition are Chumattu Thozhilali Congress (I.N.T.U.C.), Palakkad and Railway Goods Transport & General Workers Union (I.N.T.U.C. (I), Olavakkod. Original Petition is filed challenging the order of the District Labour Officer, Palakkad, Ext. P3 and the order of the Regional Joint Labour Commissioner, Ernakulam, Ext. P8 under the Headload Workers Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act')

2. Petitioners are registered trade unions functioning in the sector of headload workers in Palakkad District. First petitioner union has basic units at various places including the Railway Goods Stations, whereas the second petitioner union is functioning at the Railway Goods Station exclusively. Fifth respondent is the Palakkad Taluk Headload and General Workers Union (C.I.T.U.), while the sixth respondent is the Palakkad Jilla Headload and General Workers Federation (S.T.U.).

3. In Palakkad, there are two Rail way Stations; one is called Town Railway Station while the other is called Junction Railway Station. Town Railway Station is nearly a century old while the Junction Railway Station is comparatively new. Town Railway Station was the goods station yard for a long number of years. But by the formation of the Junction Railway Station and the improvement effected thereon, business in goods is more in the Junction Railway Station than in the Town Railway. Station.

4. According to the petitioners, there are 50 headload workers having registration with the Town Railway Goods Station while there are 24 registered headload workers in the Junction Railway Goods Station. As it is known, with the promulgation of the Kerala Headload Workers Act, 1978, it has become compulsory for the headload workers to register under the Act. The scheme framed under the Act, viz., the Headload Workers (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Scheme, 1983 has been extended to the areas covered under the Municipality of Palakkad from 1st February, 1986. After coming into force of the Scheme, a Committee was constituted under S.18 of the Act. This Committee is to exercise the powers and functions under the Scheme. Under Clause 19 of the Scheme, the Committee has to determine the number of headload workers for an area and for this purpose, the Committee has got power to increase or decrease the number in their register. Under Clause 20 of the Scheme, the Chairman has to make arrangements to pool the registered workers into as many groups as are needed and locate these groups at locations decided by him. The Committee form pools. The Town Railway Goods Station was included in pool No. 46 while the Junction Railway Good Station was included in pool No. 45. Pool No. 46 had a total membership of 50 while pool No. 45 had a total membership of 24.

5. As stated earlier, the work in the Town Railway Goods Station became less and less while the work in the Junction Railway Goods Station increased considerably. It is also stated that the Railways are taking decision to stop the goods yard at Town Railway Station. Thus, the headload workers in the Town Railway Station apprehended that the day will come when there will be no work for Town Railway Station. Hence, they approached the District Labour Officer for amalgamation of these two pools allowing all the 74 headload workers to work jointly in both the Stations. A petition was filed before the District Labour Officer, which is produced as Ext. P1.

6. The fifth respondent union objected to the above proposal. Therefore, the District Labour Officer initiated conciliation proceedings, under S.21 of the Act and conveyed a meeting of all concerned unions. Thereafter meetings were held on various dates. Notices for the meetings are produced as Ext. P2 series. Under S.21(4) of the Act, on the failure of the conciliation regarding the dispute, the District Labour Officer is authorized to take a decision thereof. Hence, the District Labour Officer conducted an enquiry and finally pas