JUDGMENT : Heard Mr John Vithayathil, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Mr P Rama Krishnan, learned Counsel for the 3rd and 4th respondents and Mr Dheeraj A S, learned Government Pleader for the State. 2. The 1st petitioner is the Association of Planters of the State of Kerala. They have filed the present writ petition challenging the vires of Rules 6(1) and 6(3) of the Kerala Plantations (Welfare Officers) Rules 1978 on the ground that the said Rules are ultra vires the provisions of Section 18(2) of the Plantation Labour Act 1951. It is also the case of the petitioners that the said Rules are unconstitutional and invalid as the Rules put unreasonable restrictions on the fundamental rights of the petitioners and its members for carrying out their trade and business which would be violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. Background Facts: 3. Before adverting to the submissions advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioners, the learned Counsel for the 3rd and 4th respondents and the learned Government Pleader, it would be apt to take note of the relevant provisions of the Plantations Labour Act 1951 and the Rules framed thereunder. 3.1 The Plantations Labour Act has been enacted to provide for the welfare of the labour and to regulate the conditions of work in plantations. In the Statement of Objects and Reasons, it is stated that the plantation industry provides employment for more than a million workers. There is no comprehensive legislation regulating the conditions of labour in the plantation industry, whereas with respect to other industries, such as tea gardens, etc, there is legislation to regulate the conditions of service of the labour. The plantation industry is a labour incentive industry. Therefore, the Government decided to enact the Plantations Labour Act for the welfare of the workers/labourers working in the plantation industry. 4. Section 18 provides for the appointment of Welfare Officers. In every plantation wherein three hundred or more workers are ordinarily employed the employer would be under a statutory duty to employ a Welfare Officer(s), as may be prescribed. 4.1 Section 18 of the Plantations Labour Act reads as under: “18. Welfare officers.- (1) In every plantation wherein three hundred or more workers are ordinarily employed the employer shall employ such number or welfare officers as, may be prescribed. 4.1 Section 18 of the Plantations Labour Act reads as under: “18. Welfare officers.- (1) In every plantation wherein three hundred or more workers are ordinarily employed the employer shall employ such number or welfare officers as, may be prescribed. (1-A) if in any plantation, welfare officers are not employed as required by the rules made under sub-section (1), the chief inspector may appoint the required number of welfare officers and there upon such officers shall be deemed to have been employed by the employer under sub-section (i): Provided that before appointing welfare officers under this sub-section the employer shall be given an opportunity of being heard. (2) The State Government may prescribe the duties, qualifications and conditions of service of officers employed under sub-section (1).” The State Government, under sub-section (2) of Section 18, is vested with the right to prescribe the duties, qualifications, and conditions of service of the Welfare Officer employed in the plantation industry. 4.2 In the exercise of the powers conferred under subsection (2) of Section 18, the State Government enacted the Kerala Plantations (Welfare Officers) Rules 1978. Rule 3 of the aforesaid Rules provides that within six months of coming into force of the Rules, the employer in every plantation where the number of workers ordinarily employed are three hundred or more shall appoint at least one Welfare Officer and where the number of workers ordinarily employed exceeds one thousand two hundred, in addition to the Welfare Officer appointed under sub-Rule (1) of Rule 3, a Welfare Officer shall be appointed for every one thousand two hundred workers or a fraction thereof in excess of the first one thousand two hundred workers. 4.3 The qualifications of Welfare Officers are mentioned in Rule 4 which are as under: “4. 4.3 The qualifications of Welfare Officers are mentioned in Rule 4 which are as under: “4. Qualifications.-- A person shall not be eligible for appointment as a Welfare Officer in any plantation unless he- (a) possesses a Degree of University recognised by the Government in this behalf; (b) has obtained a degree or diploma in any of the Social Sciences from any institution recognised by the Government in this behalf; and (c) has adequate knowledge of the language spoken by the majority of the workers in the plantation where he is to be appointed: Provided that in the case of a person who is acting as a Welfare Officer at the commencement of these rules, the Government may, subject to such conditions as it may specify, relax all or any of the aforesaid qualifications.” 4.4 The recruitment process of the Welfare Officer employed is provided in Rule 5. The conditions of service of Welfare Officer and the duties of Welfare Officer are enumerated in Rules 6 and 7, which would read as under: “6. Conditions of service of Welfare Officer.- (1) A Welfare Officer shall be given appropriate status corresponding to the status of other executive heads of the plantation. (2) The basis pay of a Welfare Officer shall not be less than Rs.*1370 per mensem, P provided that the salary of any Welfare Officer which at the commencement of these rules is higher than the minimum prescribed in this sub-rule shall not be reduced; (3) The conditions of service of a Welfare Officer shall be the same as those of other executive heads of corresponding status in the plantation: Provided that, in the case of discharge or dismissal, the Welfare Officer shall have the right of appeal to the Government whose decision thereon shall be binding upon the employer and Welfare Officer. (4) An appeal under the proviso to subrule (3) shall be preferred within thirty days from the date of receipt of the order of discharge or dismissal by the Welfare Officer. (5) No penalty shall be imposed upon a Welfare Officer by the management unless he has been first informed in writing of the grounds on which it is proposed to take action against him, and he has been afforded an adequate opportunity for defending himself. 7. (5) No penalty shall be imposed upon a Welfare Officer by the management unless he has been first informed in writing of the grounds on which it is proposed to take action against him, and he has been afforded an adequate opportunity for defending himself. 7. Duties of Welfare Officer.- The duties of Welfare Officer shall be- (i) to establish contacts and hold consultations with a view to maintaining harmonious relations between the employer and the workers; (ii) to bring to the notice of the employer the grievances of workers, individuals as well as collective with a view to securing their expeditious redressal and to act as a Liasion Officer between the employer and the workers; (iii) to study from the point of view of Labour in order to help the employer to formulate labour policies of the plantation and to interpret their policies to the workers in a language they can understand and comprehend; (iv) to watch industrial relations with a view to using his influence in the event of a dispute arising between the employer and the workers and to help them to bring about a settlement by persuasive method and to watch the working of collective agreement and the enforcement of industrial awards; (v) to advise the employer on statutory and other obligations concerning the application of the provisions of the Act and the rules made thereunder as well as other relevant labour laws; (vi) to promote relations between the employer and workers so as to bring about efficiency in production as well as amelioration in the working conditions and to help workers to adjust and adapt themselves to the working environments; (vii) to advise the employer in the matter of making provisions for amenities such as canteens, recreational facilities, social centres, creches, drinking water, food stuffs, housing, sanitation and medical facilities, sickness benefits, gratuity and education of workers, children etc., and on individual personnel problems. (viii) to help the employers in regulating the grant of leave with wages and other leave privileges and to guide the workers in the matter of submission of applications for grant of leave and for regulating authorised absence; (ix) to encourage the formation of work and joint production committees, co-operative societies and welfare committees and supervise their work; (x) to study absenteeism and labour turnover and to suggest measures to be adopted for their prevention; (xi) to suggest measures which will serve to raise the standards of living of workers and in general to promote their well-being; (xii) to deal with wage and employment matters by joint consultations with the employers and workers representative bodies. (xiii) to perform any other duty connected with the welfare of workers.” 5. Initially, the Government fixed the pay of the Welfare Officer at Rs.1,370/- per mensem. Sub-Rule (1) of Rule 6 also provides that the status of a Welfare Officer shall correspond to the status of other executive heads of the plantation. The duties of the Welfare Officer are numerous. In sum and substance, the primary duty of the Welfare Officer is to look after the welfare of the workers/labourers working on the plantation and to maintain harmonious relations between the employers and workers. 5.1 These Rules of 1978 were amended in the year 2000. Under the amended sub-rule (2) of Rule 6, the State Government is authorized to revise the scale of pay of Welfare Officers every three years, either prospectively or retrospectively, by issuing a notification in the Official Gazette. However, it is provided that the revisions should not be to the disadvantage of the Welfare Officer who is in service. 5.2 In the exercise of the said power vested with the Government under sub-rule (2) of Rule 6, the Government issued a notification on 21.04.2012 fixing the pay scale of Rs.11,070 – 18,450 (Pre-revised) plus State Dearness Allowance, which is equal to the pay scale of the Welfare Officer in the Government Public Sector Undertaking. The said notification, along with the Rules mentioned above, is under challenge in this writ petition. It may be taken note that the power of the Government to prescribe the conditions of service of the Welfare Officer of the Plantation is not under challenge. Petitioners’ submissions: 6. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the planters are private entities. The said notification, along with the Rules mentioned above, is under challenge in this writ petition. It may be taken note that the power of the Government to prescribe the conditions of service of the Welfare Officer of the Plantation is not under challenge. Petitioners’ submissions: 6. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the planters are private entities. They make the payment of pay to the Welfare Officers. The Government has fixed a very high pay of the Welfare Officer which is equal to the Welfare Officer in the Government undertaking. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the recruitment process, the duties and responsibilities of the Labour Welfare Officer in the Government undertaking are different from the Labour Welfare Officer in the plantations. The Labour Welfare Officer in the private plantations would not go with the rigour of the recruitment process as that of the Labour Welfare Officer in the Government undertaking. The unequal have been treated equally by issuing the impugned notification in Ext.P6. Therefore, it is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It also infringes upon the right of the petitioners to carry out their trade and business under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the impugned Rules, as well as the notification in Ext.P6, are liable to be quashed. 6.1 Learned Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment of the Division Bench of Patna High Court in Vishnu Sugar Mills, Ltd v. State of Bihar, 1999 (3) L.L.N.715 wherein the Division Bench of the Patna High Court, considering the provisions of the Factories Act had held that the Welfare Officer employed by the Sugar Factory and the Officer of the same rank employed in the State Government cannot be treated as equals and by allowing Government rate of Dearness Allowance to the Welfare Officer in the Sugar Factory unequal have been treated equal by the Government. State’s submissions: 7. The learned Government Pleader has, however, supported the Rules and submitted that the impugned Rules and notifications are not ultra vires Section 18 of the Plantations Labour Act. Sub-section (2) of Section 18 empowers the Government to lay down the conditions of services which would include the conditions of services for employment of Labour Welfare Officer in the Plantation. The learned Government Pleader has, however, supported the Rules and submitted that the impugned Rules and notifications are not ultra vires Section 18 of the Plantations Labour Act. Sub-section (2) of Section 18 empowers the Government to lay down the conditions of services which would include the conditions of services for employment of Labour Welfare Officer in the Plantation. The conditions of service include the designation and status, the pay and emoluments, the recruitment process, qualifications and as well as the ad valorem provisions for disciplinary proceedings. When the power of the State Government is not under challenge i.e., Section 18 of the Plantations Labour Act is not under challenge, the Rules and notifications prescribing the status and pay scale of the Welfare Officers cannot be said to be ultra vires Section 18(2) of the Act. 3rd and 4th respondents’ submissions: 8. Learned Counsel for the 3rd and 4th respondents, who are the Welfare Officers has submitted that once the Government is empowered to make Rules and issue notifications prescribing the service conditions of the Welfare Officer in the plantations and the Government in its wisdom has decided that the Welfare Officer appointed in the plantation carry the same pay scale and Dearness Allowance as of the Welfare Officer in the Government undertaking. The said provisions regarding the pay scale and Dearness Allowance cannot be said to be arbitrary or against the provisions of the Plantations Labour Act or ultra vires Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India. 8.1 It is further submitted that by providing the service conditions in the Rules and notification in respect of the Labour Welfare Officer in the plantation, there is no violation of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. It is further submitted that the Division Bench judgment of the Patna High Court in Vishnu Sugar Mills Limited (supra) is not relevant to the facts of the present case. Discussion: 9. The vires of the Rules made under an Act of legislation can be challenged on the ground that the Rules are ultra vires the provisions of the Act or the Rules are ultra vires the provisions of the Constitution of India, including the fundamental rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution. Discussion: 9. The vires of the Rules made under an Act of legislation can be challenged on the ground that the Rules are ultra vires the provisions of the Act or the Rules are ultra vires the provisions of the Constitution of India, including the fundamental rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution. 9.1 Section 18(2) of the Plantations Labour Act gives omnibus powers to the State Government to prescribe duties, qualifications and conditions of service of officers, i.e., the Labour Welfare Officer, employed in the plantations under sub-section (1) of Section 18. The provisions of Section 18(2) are not under challenge in the present writ petition. Thus, the State Government is empowered to prescribe the duties, qualifications and conditions of service of the Labour Welfare Officers employed in the plantation industry. The conditions of service obviously include the pay and emoluments, designation and status of an employee. 9.2 The plantation industry is a labour incentive industry. The Plantations Labour Act, therefore, prescribes the appointment of a Labour Welfare Officer to protect the interests of the labourers working in the plantation as well as facilitate the cordial relation between the employer and employee. The Government has framed the Rules in the exercise of its power under sub-section (2) of Section 18 of the Plantations Labour Act, namely the Kerala Plantations (Welfare Officers) Rules 1978. The qualifications of the Labour Welfare Officer are provided in Rule 4, and the conditions of service of a Welfare Officer in a plantation are prescribed in Rule 6, and the duties of the Welfare Officers are enumerated in Rule 7 of the aforesaid Rules. Sub-Rule (3) of Rule 6 provides that the conditions of service of a Welfare Officer shall be the same as those of other executive heads of corresponding status in the plantation. 9.3 So, the Rules provided in the conditions of service for the Labour Welfare Officer in the plantation cannot be said to be ultra vires of Section 18(2) of the Act. The Government is empowered to frame the Rules providing for service conditions of the Labour Welfare Officer in the plantation. In the exercise of the express power under sub-section (2) of Section 18, the Government has prescribed the service conditions. The Government is empowered to frame the Rules providing for service conditions of the Labour Welfare Officer in the plantation. In the exercise of the express power under sub-section (2) of Section 18, the Government has prescribed the service conditions. Therefore, I am of the considered view that Rule 6 of the Kerala Plantations (Welfare Officers) Rules 1978 is not ultra vires the provisions of the Plantations Labour Act. 9.4 Whether the Rules are ultra vires the provisions of the Constitution of India including the fundamental rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution of India, it may be said that by giving the status of Executive Heads of corresponding status in the plantation, it would not infringe the rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. It cannot be said that the service conditions prescribed under Rule 6 of the Rules are arbitrary. The Government, after considering the nature of work, their responsibilities, duties and recruitment process, has decided to provide conditions of service for Welfare Officers that are the same as those of other executive heads of corresponding status in the plantation and are not arbitrary. This service condition in no way puts unreasonable restrictions on the petitioners' ability to carry out their plantation business or activity. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the said provisions of Rule 6 are not violative of the Constitution of India, including the provisions of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g). 10. So far as the judgment relied on by the learned Counsel for the petitioner in the case of Vishnu Sugar Mills Limited (supra) is concerned, the Patna High Court was dealing with the Dearness Allowance to the Welfare Officers employed in a Sugar Factory. The State Government has taken a decision to prescribe Dearness Allowance to a Welfare Officer employed in the Sugar Factories equal to an officer of the same rank employed in the State Government. 10.1 Paragraphs 17, 18 and 18A of the said judgment are extracted hereunder: “17. These facts show that the Welfare Officers employed by a Sugar Factory and an officer of the same rank employed in the State Government cannot be treated as equals and by allowing the Government rate of DA to Welfare Officers, two unequals have been treated equals by the State Government. These facts show that the Welfare Officers employed by a Sugar Factory and an officer of the same rank employed in the State Government cannot be treated as equals and by allowing the Government rate of DA to Welfare Officers, two unequals have been treated equals by the State Government. The equality has to be tested keeping in view the complete set of circumstances as also the conditions of service, which in respect of these classes of officers are entirely different. The officers of the same rank employed in the Government are different, as such, they are not comparable with Welfare Officers. 18. It is well settled that DA is allowed to compensate the fall in the value of real wages, various components and increase in expenditure on such components, like housing, education, food, other things are taken into account. The increased expenditure on such components has been considered and taken note of by the Wage Board. There is no separate market of cost of living index for a Welfare Officer compared to other similarly situated officers in the sugar mills. 18A. The Welfare Officers were getting DA as allowed by the Sugar Wage Board, which calculated the same on the basis of increase in consumer price index for industrial personnel employed by the Sugar Industry.” The said judgment is not applicable to the facts of the present case. I do not find that the writ petition has merit. Therefore, the present writ petition fails, which is hereby dismissed.