PART I

Notifications and Orders issued by the Government

Labour and Rehabilitation Department

Labour and Rehabilitation (A)

ORDERS

(1)

G.O. (Rt.) No. 999/2013/LBR.

Thiruvananthapuram, 6th June 2013.

Whereas, the Government are of opinion that an

industrial dispute exists between Sri P. Jayaprakash,

Proprietor, S. N. Auditorium, Krishnapuram, Neyyattinkara

and the worker of the above referred establishment

Smt. C. Leela, Kavinpurath Roadarikathu Veedu,

Arumalurkonam, Kunnathukal, Karakkonam P. O. in

respect of matters mentioned in the annexure to this order;

And whereas, in the opinion of Government it is

necessary to refer the said industrial dispute for

adjudication;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred

by Section 10 (1) (c) of the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947

(Central Act XIV of 1947), the Government hereby direct

that the said industrial dispute be referred for adjudication

to the Labour Court, Kollam. The Labour Court will pass

the award within a period of three months.

ANNEXURE

Whether the denial of employment and Bonus for the

year 2012 to Smt. C. Leela, Cleaner by the

management of S. N. Auditorium, Neyyattinkara is

justifiable ? If not, what are the reliefs she is

entitled to ?

(2)

G.O. (Rt.) No. 1095/2013/LBR.

Thiruvananthapuram, 17th June 2013.

Whereas, the Government are of opinion that an

industrial dispute exists between Smt. Mobi Raju,

Kunnasseril,

Pulikkachira

Road,

Kanjikuzhi,

KERALA GAZETTE

tIcf Kkddv

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

B[nImcnIambn {]kn≤s∏SpØp∂Xv

©

Government of Kerala

tIcf k¿°m¿

2013

Regn. No. KERBIL/2012/45073

dated 5-9-2012 with RNI

Reg. No. cPn. \º¿

KL/TV(N)/634/2012-14

No.

\º¿

Vol. II

hmeyw 2^}

6th August 2013

2013 BKÃv 6

15th Sravana 1935

1935 {imhWw 15

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, TUESDAY

Xncph\¥]pcw, sNmΔ

32

}

6th AUG. 2013]

KERALA GAZETTE

116

Kottayam-686 004 and the workmen of the above referred

establishment represented by the General Secretary,

Kottayam District Motor and Engineering Mazdoor Sangh

B. M. S. Office, T. B. Junction, M. L. Road, Kottayam in

respect of matters mentioned in the annexure to this order ;

And whereas, in the opinion of Government it is

necessary to refer the said industrial dispute for

adjudication;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by

Section 10 (1) (d) of the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947

(Central Act XIV of 1947), the Government hereby direct

that the said industrial dispute be referred for adjudication

to the Industrial Tribunal, Idukki (Peerumedu). The

Industrial Tribunal will pass the award within a period of

three months.

ANNEXURE

Whether

the

denial

of

employment

to

Sri Sivaraman Nair, Driver, by the employer is

justifiable ? If not, what relief the workman is

entitled to ?

(3)

G.O. (Rt.) No. 1096/2013/LBR.

Thiruvananthapuram, 17th June 2013.

Whereas, the Government are of opinion that an

industrial dispute exists between the Group Manager, Ram

Bahadur Thakur Ltd., R.B.T. Group II, Thankamala Estate,

Vandiperiyar-685 533 and the workman of the above

referred establishment Sri K. G. Sadanandan, Field

Officer, Mount Estate, Uthram House, Kallar Kavala,

Pampanar P. O., Idukki District-685 537 in respect of

matters mentioned in the annexure to this order;

And whereas, in the opinion of Government it is

necessary to refer the said industrial dispute for

adjudication;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by

Section 10 (1) (d) of the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947

(Central Act XIV of 1947), the Government hereby direct

that the said industrial dispute be referred for adjudication

to the Industrial Tribunal, Idukki (Peerumedu). The

Industrial Tribunal will pass the award within a period of

three months.

ANNEXURE

Whether there is denial of employment to

Sri Sadanandan, Field Officer, Mount Estate

by the management of Ram Bahadoor Thakur

Vandiperiyar is justifiable ? If so what are the

benefits he is entitled to ?

(4)

G.O. (Rt.) No. 1097/2013/LBR.

Thiruvananthapuram, 17th June 2013.

Whereas, the Government are of opinion that an

industrial dispute exists between (1)

Sri I. Kunjukunju,

Panambatta Cashew Factory, Bathel Bungalow,

Pathanapuram (2)

Sri K. Babu, Ashirvad, Anjili Road,

Near Sanker’s Hospital, Kollam and the workman of the

above referred establishment Sri George Kutty, Mannuvila

Veedu, Melila P. O., Kottarakkara in respect of matters

mentioned in the annexure to this order;

And whereas, in the opinion of Government it is

necessary to refer the said industrial dispute for

adjudication;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by

Section 10 (1) (c) of the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947

(Central Act XIV of 1947), the Government hereby direct

that the said industrial dispute be referred for adjudication

to the Labour Court, Kollam. The Labour Court will pass

the award within a period of three months.

ANNEXURE

“Whether the denial of employment to George Kutty

by the management, Panambatta Cashew Factory

is justifiable or not ? If not, what relief the

worker is entitled to ?”

(5)

G.O. (Rt.) No. 1099/2013/LBR.

Thiruvananthapuram, 17th June 2013.

Whereas, the Government are of opinion that an

industrial dispute exists between the Manager, Pambanar

Estate, Pambanar P. O., Peerumedu, Idukki District and the

workmen of the above referred establishment represented

by the General Secretary, Highrange Plantation Workers

Union, H. O. Peerumedu P. O. in respect of matters

mentioned in the annexure to this order;

And whereas, in the opinion of Government it is

necessary to refer the said industrial dispute for

adjudication;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by

Section 10 (1) (d) of the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947

(Central Act XIV of 1947), the Government hereby direct

that the said industrial dispute be referred for adjudication

to the Industrial Tribunal, Idukki (Peerumedu). The

Industrial Tribunal will pass the award within a period of

three months.

ANNEXURE

Whether the termination of service of Sri Sankar,

Supervisor of Pambanar Estate, Pambanar by way

of retirement due to superannuation with effect

from 31-8-2008 is justifiable or not; If not, what

relief he is entitled to ?

6th AUG. 2013]

KERALA GAZETTE

117

(6)

G . O. (Rt.) No. 1101/2013/LBR.

Thiruvananthapuram, 17th June 2013.

Whereas, the Government are of opinion that an

industrial dispute exists between the Manager,

Ram Bahadur Thakur Co. Ltd., Mount Estate,

Mount P. O., Vandiperiyar and the workman of the above

referred establishment Sri David Roy S/o Late Sabarimala,

Mount Estate, Mount P. O., Vandiperiyar in respect of

matters mentioned in the annexure to this order;

And whereas, in the opinion of Government it is

necessary to refer the said industrial dispute for

adjudication;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by

Section 10 (1) (d) of the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947

(Central Act XIV of 1947), the Government hereby direct

that the said industrial dispute be referred for adjudication

to the Industrial Tribunal, Idukki (Peerumedu). The

Industrial Tribunal will pass the award within a period of

three months.

ANNEXURE

Whether the denial of watcher job to Sri David Roy

(C.R.No. 2006), Mount Estate, Vandiperiyar

managed by Ram Bahadur Thakur Co. Ltd. by the

management is justifiable? If not, what relief he is

entitled to?

(7)

G . O. (Rt.) No. 1098/2013/LBR.

Thiruvananthapuram, 17th June 2013.

Whereas, the Government are of opinion that an

industrial dispute exists between the Managing Director,

Autocast Ltd., S. N. Puram P. O., Cherthala-688 582 and the

workmen of the above referred establishment represented

by (1) the General Secretary, Kerala Independent Silk

Employees Union, Autocast Unit, S. N. Puram P. O.,

Cherthala (2) the Secretary, Silk Employees Union (CITU) ,

Autocast Unit, S. N. Puram P. O., Cherthala (3) the

Secretary, All Kerala Silk Employees Union (INTUC),

Autocast Unit, S. N. Puram P. O., Cherthala in respect of

matters mentioned in the annexure to this order;

And whereas, in the opinion of Government it is

necessary to refer the said industrial dispute for

adjudication;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by

Section 10 (1) (d) of the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947

(Central Act XIV of 1947), the Government hereby direct

that the said industrial dispute be referred for adjudication

to the Industrial Tribunal,Alappuzha. The Industrial

Tribunal will pass the award within a period of three

months.

ANNEXURE

“Whether the demand of permanancy of temporary

workers in the Autocast Ltd., S. N. Puram P. O.,

Cherthala is justifiable ? If so, what is the relief

they are entitled to ?”

(8)

G.O. (Rt.) No. 1100/2013/LBR.

Thiruvananthapuram, 17th June 2013.

Whereas, the Government are of opinion that an

industrial dispute exists between the Manager, Ashley

Estate, Pallikunnu P. O., Peerumedu and the workmen of

the above referred establishment represented by

Sri P. M. Varkeydurai, Secretary, K. P. W. Union (INTUC),

Peerumedu in respect of matters mentioned in the

annexure to this order;

And whereas, in the opinion of Government it is

necessary to refer the said industrial dispute for

adjudication;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by

Section 10 (1) (d) of the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947

(Central Act XIV of 1947), the Government hereby direct

that the said industrial dispute be referred for adjudication

to the Industrial Tribunal, Idukki (Peerumedu). The

Industrial Tribunal will pass the award within a period of

three months.

ANNEXURE

Whether

the

termination

of

Service

of

Smt. Njana Selvam (C. R. No. 715), worker of

Ashley Estate, Peerumedu by way of retirement

due to superannuation with effect from 31-7-2011

by the management is justifiable or not; If not,

what relief she is entitled to?

(9)

G.O. (Rt.) No. 1178/2013/LBR.

Thiruvananthapuram, 29th June 2013.

Whereas, the Government are of opinion that an

industrial dispute exists between (1)

Mr. Bimal Kumar Jha,

Hny. Controller, Sulabh International Social Service

Organisation, Near Passport Office, TC 43/300,

Ottukal Street, Kaithamukku, Thiruvananthapuram

(2) Dr. Bindeswari Pathak, Chairman, Sulabh International.,

Sulabh Bhavan., Mahavir Enclave, Palam Dabari Marg.

New Delhi-110 045 and the workmen of the above

referred establishment represented by the Secretary, Centre

of Trade Union (CITU), Thiruvananthapuram District

Committee, Chirakkulam Road, Thiruvananthapuram-1 in

respect of matters mentioned in the annexure to this order;

And whereas, in the opinion of Government it is

necessary to refer the said industrial dispute for

adjudication;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by

Section 10 (1) (c) of the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947

(Central Act XIV of 1947), the Government hereby direct

that the said industrial dispute be referred for adjudication

to the Labour Court, Kollam. The Labour Court will

pass the award within a period of three months.

6th AUG. 2013]

KERALA GAZETTE

118

ANNEXURE

Whether the alleged denial of employment to 19

workers namely Rajeev Kumar Jha, Bahulu Jha,

Ajith Misra, Ram Sundar Jha, Adith Upadhyaya,

Uthamkumar

Jha,

Rakesh

Kumar

Jha,

Tharun Kumar Jha, Syam Sundar Sarma,

Manojkumar Jha, Ramesh Chowdhari, Johindar

Kumar Singh, Pintu Misra, Bajaramgi Chowdhari,

Saryesh Jha, Sarvan Ram, Abadesh Singh, Udaya

Kumar Jha, Ravindhar Chowdhari by the

management of Sulabh International is justifiable ?

If not, what relief they are enetitled to ?

(10)

G.O. (Rt.) No. 1188/2013/LBR.

Thiruvananthapuram, 1st July 2013.

Whereas, the Government are of opinion that an

industrial dispute exists between (1)

The Manager,

Pepsico, India Holding Pvt. Ltd., Wise Park NIDA.,

Kanjikode, Palakkad (2) Sri Ramdas (Contractor), M/s.

Chaidanya Enterprises, No.1, Wise Park NIDA, Kanjikode,

Palakkad (3) Sri Hariharan (Contractor) M/s. G4S,

C/o M/s. Chaidanya Enterprises, No. 1, Wise Park NIDA,

Kanjikode, Palakkad and the workmen of the above

referred establishment represented by the (1) General

Secretary, Pepsico Workers Association (INTUC),

KSS Nivas, Chullimada, Kanjikode P. O., Palakkad

(2) General Secretary, Palakkad Taluk Engineering and

Industrial General Workers Union (CITU), Wise Park

NIDA, Kanjikode, Palakkad (3) General Secretary, Palakkad

District Engineering and Industrial Masdoor Sangh (BMS),

BMS Office, Hirikkara Street, Palakkad in respect of

matters mentioned in the annexure to this order;

And whereas, in the opinion of Government it is

necessary to refer the said industrial dispute for

adjudication;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by

Section 10 (1) (d) of the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947

(Central Act XIV of 1947), the Government hereby direct

that the said industrial dispute be referred for adjudication

to the Industrial Tribunal, Palakkad. The Industrial Tribunal

will pass the award within a period of three months.

ANNEXURE

Whether the demand of the contract worker for

regularization in M/s Pepsico India Holding Pvt.

Ltd., Kanjikode, Palakkad is justifiable? If Yes,

what are the benefits they are entitled to?

(11)

G.O. (Rt.) No. 1198/2013/LBR.

Thiruvananthapuram, 3rd July 2013.

Whereas, the Government are of opinion that an

industrial dispute exists between The Director, Malabar

Cancer Centre, Kodiyeri, Thalassery and the worker of the

above referred establishment Smt. K. Radha,

Thadaparambil House, Kuttikattoor in respect of matters

mentioned in the annexure to this order;

And whereas, in the opinion of Government it is

necessary to refer the said industrial dispute for

adjudication;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by

Section 10 (1) (c) of the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947

(Central Act XIV of 1947), the Government hereby direct

that the said industrial dispute be referred for adjudication

to the Labour Court, Kozhikode. The Labour Court will

pass the award within a period of three months .

ANNEXURE

Whether the denial of employment to Smt. K. Radha,

Thadaparambil House, Kuttikattoor by the

employer of Malabar Cancer Centre, Kodiyeri,

Thalassery is justifiable ? If not, what relief she is

entitled to ?

By order of the Governor,

RAJANIKANT R. BALIGA,

Under Secretary to Government.