IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2010 / 17TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 12144 of 2010(P) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. CHURAKULAM TEA ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED, VANDIPERIYAR, PEERUMEDU, IDUKKI DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER GEORGE VARGHESE. 2. GEORGE VARGHESE, MANAGER, CHURAKULAM TEA ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED, PEERUMEDU, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR SMT.G.CHITRA RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE HOME SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VANDIPERIYAR. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUMILY. 4. ANISH, S/O.SOMAN, RESIDING AT CHURAKULAM LOWER DIVISION, PUTHUVAL, VANDIPERIYAR KARA, PERIYAR VILLAGE. 5. V.VIJAYAN, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, RESIDING AT CHURAKULAM LOWER DIVISION, PUTHUVAL, VANDIPERIYAR KARA, PERIYAR VILLAGE. GP., SHRI P N SUKUMARAN FOR R1 - 3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).No. 12144 of 2010 P - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 7th day of April, 2010 JUDGMENT Joseph, J. The petitioners have approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: “i) to declare that the petitioners are entitled for adequate and necessary police protection as sought for in Exts.P2 to P4; ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing respondents 2 and 3 to take effective steps for preventing the illegal and unauthorised widening of the pathway by respondents 4 and 5 and their supporters in violation of Ext.P1 order issued by the Munsiff Court, Peerumedu; W.P.(C).No. 12144 of 2010 2 iii) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing respondents 2 and 3 to afford necessary and adequate police protection for the life and property of the petitioners and their staff by removing the illegal and unauthorised activities of respondents 4 and 5 and their supporters, forthwith in the interest of justice.” 2. Briefly the case of the petitioners is as follows. The first petitioner is a Limited Company having in possession of 25 hectares of tea estate in Periyar Village, It is stated that from Vandiperiyar town there is a road having a width of 8 to 10 feet through the property of the petitioners. Respondents 4 and 5 are staying in the colonized area. They, along with their henchmen, entered into the property and tried to widen the road. The staff of the petitioners intervened. When there was subsequent attempt, O.S.No. 56 of 2010 was filed and an order of injunction was obtained. During the pendency of the injunction order, respondents 4 and 5 again widened the pathway and W.P.(C).No. 12144 of 2010 3 the petitioners filed a petition before the court. Due to this, the petitioners and their staff were threatened by respondents 4 and 5. 3. Essentially the matter is seized of by a Civil court and an order of injunction was also passed. 4. Accordingly we dispose of the Writ Petition relegating the petitioners to pursue their remedy before the competent civil court. If the petitioners complain about commission of a cognizable offence, action shall be taken in accordance with law. (K. M. JOSEPH) Judge (M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS) Judge tm