Employers have the right to engage skilled workers or machinery as per Section 9A of the Kerala Headload Workers Act.

JUDGMENT :

N. NAGARESH, J.

1. The petitioner is a Company having its registered office in Rajasthan. The grievance of the petitioner is that the persons under the 4th respondent are obstructing the attempt of the petitioner to unload their Transformers using mechanical tools.

2. The petitioner states that the Company is the awardee of a tender invited by the INKEL Ltd., Government of Kerala. They are constructing the Cochin Cancer Research Centre, Ernakulam, which is a flagship project of the petitioner.

3. The petitioner has purchased Distribution Transformer Copper wound 11 KV-Dry Type Indoor Case Resin-2000 KVA from Intrans Elector Components Private Limited as per Ext.P2 invoice. When the petitioner attempted to unload the said Transformer using crane, the 4th respondent and persons under him obstructed the petitioner demanding Nokku kooli, alleges the petitioner.

4. Though the petitioner approached the 1st respondent seeking protection from the illegal obstruction by the 4th respondent and persons under him, protection is not given. Unless this Court direct the 1st respondent to provide adequate protection to the petitioner and his workers for unloading the Transformers and other items which required to be unloaded with the aid of the machinery in the worksite for construction, the Cochin Cancer Research Centre at Ernakulam Government Medical College, Kalamassery without any obstruction from the unwanted interference and the illegal action of the 4th respondent, the petitioner will be put to irreparable loss.

5. Counsel entered appearance on behalf of the 4th respondent and resisted the writ petition. On behalf of the 4th respondent, it is submitted that the workers under the 4th respondent were carrying out all loading and unloading work of the petitioner. The area where the issue arises is an area where the Kerala Headload Workers (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Scheme, 1983 has been operationalized. Therefore, only registered headload workers in Pool No. 5 have any right to do loading and unloading work. The petitioner does not have any attached registered headload workers having registration under Rule 26A.

6. On behalf of the 4th respondent, it is further submitted that a Memorandum of Settlement has been arrived for the period 2021 to 2023 in the construction area in Ernakulam District. The Settlement was signed in the presence of the District Labour Officer (General). The authorised signatory of the petitioner has signed the Memorandum of Settlement. The Memorandum of Settlement takes in Generators, Motor Pumps, Transformers and other heavy machinery. In view of Ext.P1 Memorandum of Settlement, the petitioner is bound to engage the registered headload workers under the pool.

7. The 4th respondent further pointed out that the petitioner has been engaging the workers under the 4th respondent for unloading heavy UPS batteries and other items weighing up to 9.20 Tones. The petitioner has no case that the machinery and UPS which are being unloaded are of such a nature that it can be unloaded only by skilled workers. In view of Ext.R4(D) also, the contention of the petitioner is liable to be rejected.

8. Counsel for the 4th respondent further pointed out that Ext.R4(C) application would show that the petitioner had submitted application for registration as an employer under the Kerala Headload Workers Welfare Fund. As the petitioner has already sought for registration, the petitioner is bound to engage registered headload workers from the headload workers' pool.

9. It is finally contended that there is a Settlement entered into between the petitioner and the respondents, whereunder the petitioner has agreed to engage the pool workers at the rate fixed in Ext.R4(D) Settlement. The said Settlement has been entered into subsequent to the filing of the writ petition. Therefore, the writ petition has become infructuous and for that reason also the same is liable to be rejected.

10. Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf of