Judgment :- 1. These petitions are by the same land-owner, against orders passed by the Conciliation Officer under S 20 of the Kerala Agricultural Workers Act, and the orders of the Agricultural Tribunal confirming them in appeal. 2. The petitioner's case before the Conciliation Officer was that he had not employed the applicants. Despite several notices, however, he did not effectively participate in the enquiry. On behalf of the applicants, oral evidence was adduced to show that they were employed by the petitioner. The petitioner did not adduce any evidence, though at the fag end of the enquiry, he produced an extract from the register maintained under S.35 to show that during the previous year, one of the applicants was the agricultural worker of another landowner. 3. It is contended that in view of S.35 of the Act, and R.20 to 22 of the Agricultural Workers Rules, only extracts from the register could be treated as relevant and conclusive evidence regarding employer-employee relationship In the case of one of the applications, no such extract had been produced, and according to counsel, the Conciliation Officer should have rejected that application on that ground alone. In the other, the extract produced by the petitioner should have been treated as conclusive evidence that the applicant was an employee of another land-owner. 4. I am unable to accept the above contentions. S.35 and R.20 deal with preparation and maintenance of a register of agricultural workers by the local authority, and R.21 and 22 deal with amendment and revision of the register So far as the (initial) preparation of the register is concerned, the Section and the relevant Rule do not provide for any notice to the landowner and for an enquiry with his participation, before making entries in the register. The worker makes an application in Form 6 and the executive authority makes entries in Form 7. When the register is so prepared and maintained, a worker whose name is not included, can apply for amendment in Form 6, and the executive authority is to add his name also"after such enquiry as it deems fit". And no procedure at all is prescribed for revision under R.22. When the register is so prepared and maintained, a worker whose name is not included, can apply for amendment in Form 6, and the executive authority is to add his name also"after such enquiry as it deems fit". And no procedure at all is prescribed for revision under R.22. The only provision for any enquiry in the course of preparing, amending or revising the register is the one contained in R.21 (2) relating to addition of names omitted; and even here, it does not appear that the executive authority is obliged to give any notice to the land-owner named in the Form 6 application. In other words, the entries in the register are not the result of any enquiry where the land-owners could have their say; they may as well be made without their knowledge. And it is difficult to hold that the result of such enquiries is intended to be acted upon as the only piece of admissible evidence, or conclusive evidence, when employer-employee relationship is disputed in other proceedings. The Act and the Rules are also silent as to the evidentiary value of entries made in the register. 5. In the case on hand, the oral evidence adduced on behalf of the applicants remained unchallenged. The mere circumstance that no extract from the register was produced in one case, and an extract showing a different position was produced in the other, is insufficient to hold that the Conciliation Officer was bound to reject the claims on such ground alone. 6. The appellate authority had observed that the appeals were time-barred. The correctness of this view need not be examined, because, after making the above observation, the authority had considered both the appeals on merits also. The views taken by the Conciliation Officer and the Appellate Authority were possible views on the disputed question of fact, and there are therefore no grounds for interference under Art.226 of the Constitution. Original Petitions dismissed. No costs.