IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Gopinath P., J
AHEMMAD P.M. – Appellant
Versus
THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of business operations and its compliance with the headload workers act (Para 1) |
| 2. opposition from headload workers regarding business operations (Para 2) |
| 3. court's obligation to uphold compliance with statutory definitions and registration requirements (Para 3) |
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the proprietor of a concern known as Cresent Hardware & Steels. According to the petitioner he is engaged in the sale of electrical equipments, sanitary wares, plumbing materials, paint, varnishes and other construction materials and has several showrooms across the State of Kerala. The petitioner states that he has started a new showroom at Kaniyambetta in Wayanad District after obtaining necessary licences and permissions. The petitioner is before this Court with a grievance that respondents 5 to 8, claiming to be headload workers at Kaniyambetta have threatened to obstruct the business of the petitioner unless they are engaged for all loading and unloading work. According to the petitioner, the establishment of the petitioner does not fall within the definition of 'establishment' under Section 2 (j) of the Kerala Headload Workers Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as th
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.