JUDGMENT

Dated this the 25th day of August, 2022 This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

“i) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents Nos.2 and 3 to afford sufficient and adequate police protection to the lives of the petitioners from the respondents 6 to 11 and persons under them.”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader, the learned counsel appearing for respondents 6, 7, 8 and 11.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are scattered workers having registration under Rule 26A of the Kerala Head Load Workers Rules, 1981 and Exhibits P1 to P1(g) are the identity cards issued to them. By Exhibit P2 proceedings of the Assistant Labour Officer the petitioners were found entitled to registration and the cards were issued. Respondents 6 and 7 are the Convener and President of the Trade Union in which respondents 8 and 11 are members. It is submitted that respondents 8 and 11 are pool workers in the Head Load Workers Pool No.AD/15 coming under the 5th respondent. The right to load and unload fish in the Aryanad Fish Market has been allotted to the petitioners, who are the scattered workers, by the Assistant Labour Officer and that the said decision has been communicated to the 5th respondent by Exhibit P4. It is submitted that respondents 6 to 11 are obstructing the activities of the petitioners and that the complaint submitted by the petitioners before the police have not evoked any response. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are being attacked and manhandled by the contesting party respondents and that the police is not providing adequate protection to the petitioners. On these grounds the petitioners seek police protection.

4. The 5th respondent has placed a statement on record. It is contended that the area in question is a scheme covered area. It is submitted that Head Load Workers of Pool No.AD/15 being registered pool workers, are entitled to do the loading and unloading work particularly of vegetable and cattle feed in the Aryanad market area. It is submitted that due to Covid-19 pandemic, loading and unloading work had decreased considerably and the registered pool workers had made representations to the 5th respondent demanding work in the fish market, which comes within the scheme implemented area. It is submitted that the officials of the 5th respondent held discussion with both the parties on 16.09.2021 and a report of the aforesaid meeting was submitted before the Sub Committee on 24.09.2021. The same was also duly reported to the Assistant Labour Officer, Nedumangad by letter dated 08.10.2021. It is stated that the Assistant Labour Officer, Nedumanagad in his reply had informed that the work alloted to the scattered workers is confined to the Aryanad Fish Market alone.

5. Respondents 6 to 8 and 11 have also placed a counter affidavit on record. It is submitted therein that the registration granted to the petitioners as per Exhibit P2 is without complying with any of the procedure as provided in Rule 26A of the Kerala Head Load Workers Rules. It is submitted that on coming to know of the grant of registration to the petitioners, the pool workers have preferred Exhibits R6(c) and R6(d) appeals as against Exhibits P2 and P4 communications. It is submitted that since all the establishments in the Aryanad market area are located in a scheme covered area, the head load workers of pool No.AD/15 have every right to do the loading and unloading work in the establishments within the market and that the contentions to the contrary are absolutely incorrect and cannot be accepted. It is submitted that orders, if any, passed by the Assistant Labour Officer, without hearing the pool workers are non est in law and not binding . 6. Petitioners have filed applications to receive documents producing Exhibit P5 communi