IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2010 / 8TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 9687 of 2010(I) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- 1. D.GARRYDAS, REMANIKA, MAYYANAD P.O., KOLLAM. 2. THANKAMANI AMMA, SREE VALSAM, KANNIMEL CHERRY, KAVANADU P.O., KOLLAM. 3. L.LAVESH, NADAYIL MEENATHU VEEDU, MARUTHADI P.O., KOLLAM. BY ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) SRI.MATHEW SUNNY RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHATHANNUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, KOLLAM. 4. JAYAN.G., CHARUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, VAZHAPPALLY, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE P.O., UMAYANALLOOR, KOLLAM. 5. S.BABU, KOCHU VEEDU, PULLICHIRA P.O.,KOLLAM. 6. N.VINOD, KRISHNA VILASOM, KANNIMEL NAGAR, KAVANAD P.O., KOLLAM. 7. ANIL KUMAR.G., KALLOR VILA KIZHAKKATHIL, THRIKKADAVOOR, MATHILIL P.O., KOLLAM. 8. S.VINOD,, KOOTTUNGAL VEEDU, RAMANKULANKARA, KAVANAD P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. 9. THE GENERAL SECRETARY, QUILON DISTRICT MOTOR AND MECHANICAL WORKERS UNION C.I.T.U. BHAVAN, KOLLAM-13. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS. ADV. SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR FOR R4 TO R9 SRI.LEO GEORGE FOR R4 TO R 9 SRI.K.P.SUJESH KUMAR FOR R4 TO R 9 SRI.K.N.SASIDHARAN NAIR FOR R4 TO R 9 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.9687 OF 2010-I PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1.TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 9TH RESPONDENT TO THE IST AND 2ND PETITIONERS DATED 27.1.2010. EXT.P2. -DO- TO THE THIRD PETITIONER. EXT.P3.TURE COPY OF THE LETTER GIVEN BY THE IST PETITIOENR TO the 9TH RESPONDENT DATED 2.2.2010. EXT.P4. TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED TO THE 8TH RESPONDENT DATED 3.2.2010. EXT.P5.TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERS DATED 2.2.2010. EXT.P6.TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER GIVEN BY THE FIRST PETITIONER TO ONE OF THE EMPLOYEES DATED 9.3.2010. EXT.P7.TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE GIVEN BY THE 9TH RESPONDENT DATED 5.3.2010. EXT.P8.TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 19.3.2010. EXT.P9.TRUE COPY OF THE LAST TRIP SHEET DATED 1.11.2009 PREPARED BY VINOD, CONDUCTOR (6TH RESPONDENT). EXT.P10.TRUE COPY OF THE SUMMARY OF TOTAL COLLECTION FROM 1.4.10 UP TO 31.5.10. EXT.P11.TURE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE ATTENDENCE REGISTER FOR THE MONTH OF MAY, 2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R6A.TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SENT BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE IST PETITIONER DATED 13.3.2010. EXT.R6B. TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE PETITIOENR TO THE 9TH RESPONDENT DATED NIL. EXT.R6C.TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE 9TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 1.5.2010. EXT.R6D.TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 9TH REPONDENT DATED 12.5.2010. K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.9687 of 2010-I ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 29th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: “i. to issue a writ of mandamus or order or direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to remove the unlawful obstruction caused by the respondents 4 to 9 and their men in the stage carriage buses owned and operated by the petitioners in their respective permitted routs; ii. to issue a writ of mandamus or order or direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to afford adequate police protection for the smooth running of the stage carriage buses owned and operated by the petitioners (KL-2P/7122, KL-2M/2455, KL-2Z/3330, KL-2U/9594, KL-2-AA/3330, KL-2N/1402 and KL-2K/7068) without any obstruction or hindrance from respondents 4 to 9 or their men; iii. to issue a writ of mandamus or order or direction to the first respondent Superintendent of police to see that the petitioners are able to do the operation of their stage carriage buses on the permitted route without any obstruction from respondents 4 to 9 or their men; iv. to issue a writ of mandamus or order or direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and take appropriate action WPC 9687/2010 -2- on Ext.P8 representation as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a time limit that may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.” 2. We have already passed an interim order. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties we make the interim order absolute and dispose of the writ petition. Necessarily, if the respondent workers do not join for duty as contemplated in the order the petitioners will be free to take action as is enabled in law. We make it clear that we have not pronounced on the right of the first petitioner to transfer the vehicles which is allegedly transferred in favour of petitioners 2 and 3 which is a matter to be decided in the appropriate forum. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE. MS