Employer's decision on the requirement of headload workers in an establishment cannot be faulted.

JUDGMENT :

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

1. Petitioners 1 to 3 have filed an application under Section 26A of the Kerala Headload Workers Rules, 1981; seeking registration as headload workers. Though the said application was filed on 22.10.2021, the 1st respondent had by Ext.P4 letter dated 23.10.2021, intimated that the application of petitioners cannot be considered since registration granted earlier to three other employees of the 4th petitioner's establishment was under challenge before this Court.

2. I have heard Advocate Philip J. Vettickattu, the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Advocate Sabeena P. Ismail, the learned Government Pleader for the respondent.

3. The grant or rejection of an application for registration of other employees of the same establishment is not a ground to refuse even a consideration of applications filed by other employees of the very same establishment. The need or the requirement of headload workers in an establishment and their numbers are all matters to be decided by the employer. If the employer feels that engagement of more number of head load workers are required in the establishment, the said decision cannot be faulted. Therefore, the refusal of the respondent to consider the application filed by petitioners 1 to 3 is not in accordance with law.

4. Therefore, I direct the respondent to consider Ext.P1, Ext.P2 and Ext.P3 applications filed by petitioners 1 to 3, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to mention, petitioners 1 to 3 shall be granted an opportunity of hearing before a decision is taken in that regard. The writ petition is disposed of as above.