IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 18TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 27000 of 2011(Y) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- C.K.PONNAMMA. W/O.SASIDHARAN, PADMALAYAM, PUNNAPRA VILLAGE, PUNNAPRA PO, AMBALAPUZHA TALUK,ALAPPUZHA DIST. BY ADVS. SRI.R.AZAD BABU, SMT.H.ANJALIDEVI. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA 688 001. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PUNNAPRA POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA 688 004. 3. LATHA, W/O. VINOD, ALISERIL VEDU PUNNAPRA POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA 688 004. 4. BINU VINOD, S/O. VINOD,...DO.... 5. KRISHNA PRIYA, D/O.KRISHNAN, KATTUNKAL ,PUNNAPRA PO, ALAPPUZHA 688 004. 6. YAMUNA, ALISSERY THEKKE VEEDU, PUNNAPRA PO, ALAPPUZHA 688 004. 7. VALSALA, PUTHUVALVELIYIL PUNNAPRA PO, ALAPPUZHA 688 004. R1 & R2 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.K.ABOOBACKER R3 TO R7 BY ADV. SRI.P.KRISHNA KUMAR (ALAPPUZHA) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.37000/2011 Y APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LICENCE DT.16.4.2010 OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER TO CONDUCT TODDY SHOP. EXT.P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A1-1787/2007 DT.8.8.2011 GRANTED BY THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF LICENCE NO.235/11-12 ISSUED IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER BY THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE ALAPPUZHA DT.3.10.2011. EXT.P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DT.10.10.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K. HARILAL, JJ. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No. 27000 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 9th day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The petitioner, a lady, is seeking directions for police protection for the conduct of a toddy shop No.85 within the Alappuzha Excise Range. According to the petitioner, after the licence was granted to her she conducted the toddy shop in a building very near to the fish landing centre at Punnapra. The party respondents and a few others belonging to the locality raised protest and in the wake of such protest, the toddy shop was shifted to another building which was in front of the fishing land itself. Protest continued at that venue. In the wake of such continued protest, the toddy shop was again shifted to a 3rd building. Agitations continued in the new premises also. Now, the toddy shop was again shifted to the 4th building where it is being conducted. On receiving the complaint of the petitioner, the local police convened a conference of the toddy WPC.No.27000/2011 2 shop manager as well as the agitating local public. But, the conference was not successful. There is continued agitation and protest against the conduct of the toddy shop. 3. The learned counsel for the party respondents Sri.P.Krishna Kumar submitted that the party respondents and other persons of the locality are only peacefully agitating against the toddy shop. Peaceful agitation may not prevented under the cover of police protection directions. 4. Sri.R.Azad Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is not a peaceful agitation that the party respondents and their people are conducting. They are physically assaulting the employees of the toddy shop and the customers who are coming to the toddy shop. As a result of these obstruction tactics, the petitioner is not in a position to conduct the toddy shop. The petitioner is bound to give a substantial amount by way of kist to the Government. 5. Having considered the submissions addressed at the Boar, we are of the view that in the backdrop of what was happened so far, the licensee of toddy shop No.85 of Alappuzha Excise Range is justified in seeking police protection for peaceful WPC.No.27000/2011 3 conduct of the toddy shop. We direct respondents 1 and 2 to afford adequate protection to the petitioner, all the employees of her toddy shop No.85 as well as to the customers who are coming to the toddy shop to have their ingress and egress to the toddy shop and for the purpose of working in the toddy shop and for consuming toddy. If there is any obstruction to the above permitted activities, respondents 1 and 2 shall remove such obstructions. But, we make it clear that this judgment does not prohibit the party respondents and persons who owe allegiance to them from conducting peaceful agitation against the toddy shop. It should be ensured that the agitation does not cross the limits and does not amount to obstructing the employees of the toddy shop and the customers who come to the toddy shop. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE K. HARILAL, JUDGE. dpk WPC.No.27000/2011 4