IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 1ST MARCH 2011 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 30056 of 2009(B) ----------------------------------- PETITIONERS: ---------------- 1. HAMEEM.M, S/O.MOIDU, THOTTAM VEEDU, THANNEERPANTHAL, KINASSERRY P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. RAVI.P., S/O.PAZHANI, KELAKKODE, THANNEERPANTHAL, KINASSERRY P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. PRABHU.V., S/O.VELAN, DO. DO. 4. S.SHIHABUDEEN, S/O.SAKEER HUSSAIN, THANNEERPANTHAL, KINASSERRY P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 5. MUHAMMED SHAFEEQ.N., S/O.NOOR MUHAMMED THANNEERPANTHAL, KINASSERRY P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 6. BIJU.K., S/O.KANDACHAMI, MAYILKODU, THANNEERPANTHAL, KINASSERRY P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 7. ABDUL MUTHALEEF.S., S/O.SHAMSUDEEN, THANNEERPANTHAL, KINASSERRY P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K. RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAKKAD. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TOWN SOUTH POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD. WP(C).No. 30056 of 2009(B) 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TOWN SOUTH POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD. 4. K.NATARAJAN, S/O.KASU, ANTHOORKAVU, KINASSERRY P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 5. THE ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER, CIRCLE NO.2, THOZHIL BHAVAN, CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD. R1 TO R3 & R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER,SMT.CHARISMA R4 BY ADV. SRI.P.K.MOHANAN(PALAKKAD) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 30056 of 2009(B) APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1: COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 26.3.2009 PASSED IN WP(C) NO.28632/2006, ON THE FILE OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. EXHIBIT P2: COPY OF IDENTITY CARDS ISSUED TO THE PETITIONERS. EXHIBIT P3: COPY OF COMMUNICATIONS DATED 18.7.2009 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONERS, INVOKING THE KERALA HEADLOAD WORKERS (SCATTERED CATEGORY) WELFARE SCHEME, 1999. EXHIBIT P4: COPY OF CERTIFICATE DATED 22.8.2009 ISSUED TO THE RESPONDENT NO.5 BY UPPUMPADAM KSHEEROLPADAKA SAHAKARANA SANGHAM, P.146, KINASSERRY P.O. EXHIBIT P5: COPY OF COMMUNICATION ISSUED BYNOOR MUHAMMED, THANNERPANTHAL TO THE RESPONDENT NO.5. EXHIBIT P6: COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY NOWSHAD, THANNEERPANTHAL, TO THE RESPONDENT NO.5. EXHIBIT P7: COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY YAKOOB, THANNEERPANTHAL, TO THE RESPONDENT NO.5. EXHIBIT P8: COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY SIVAKUMAR, THOTTUPALAM, TO THE RESPONDENT NO.5. EXHIBIT P9: COPY OF PETITION DATED 13.10.2009, SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER NO.1 BEFORE RESPONDENT NO.3. EXHIBIT P10: COPY OF PETITION DATED 19.10.2009 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE RESPONDENT NO.1. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT R4(a): COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY THE NATIVE SHOP KEEPER AT UPPUMPADAM NAMED SELVAN TO DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, PALAKKAD. EXHIBIT R4(b): COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY A NATIVE AGRICULTURIST AT UPPUMPADAM CALLED SWAMINATHAN TO D.L.O, PALAKKAD. EXHIBIT R4(c): COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY A NATIVE OF UPPUMPADAM CALLED NOORMUHAMMED TO DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, PALAKKAD. EXHIBIT R4(d): COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY A NATIVE OF UPPUMPADAM NAMED SULAIMAN DATED 29.10.2009 TO D.L.O., PALAKKAD. EXHIBIT R4(e): COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY KASIM A NATIVE OF UPPUMPADAM TO D.L.O., PALAKKAD. EXHIBIT R4(f): COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY AN AGRICULTRIST OF UPPUMPADAM RAJADAS TO D.L.O., PALAKKAD. EXHIBIT R4(g): COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY JANARDHANAN, NATIVE OF UPPUMPADAM TO D.L.O., PALAKKAD. EXHIBIT R4(h): COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY KRISHNADAS, S/O.SUKUMARAN TO D.L.O., PALAKKAD. EXHIBIT R4(i): COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY NATIVE OF UPPUMPADAM KRISHNADAS, S/O. BALAN TO D.L.O., PALAKKAD. EXHIBIT R4(j): COPY OF APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF HEADLOAD WORKERS BEFORE THE ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER, II CIRCLE, PALAKKAD ON 17.8.2009. /TRUE COPY/ PS TO JUDGE R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No. 30056 of 2009 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant, J. The petitioners, seven in number, have come to this Court seeking issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution to respondents 1 to 3 to afford police protection to them to carry on their activities as headload workers. According to the petitioners, they have applied for and have obtained registration as headload workers. They are registered under the scheme. The fourth respondent is attempting to interfere with their work. Exhibits P9 and P10 petitions filed by them have not evoked any useful and meaningful action on the part of respondents 1 to 3. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioners came to this Court with this petition on 22.10.2009 seeking issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution. WPC.30056/09 2 2. The learned Government Pleader appears for respondents 1 to 3 and 5 and the fourth respondent is represented by a counsel. The learned Government Pleader as also learned counsel for the fourth respondent assert that on the relevant date the area was not a scheme covered area. In these circumstances, the petitioners are not entitled to any relief. 3. The petitioners do not dispute the fact that if the area is not a scheme covered area, the petitioners are not entitled to any relief. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits, but the situation has now changed and two weeks prior to this date, a notification has been issued including the area in question as a scheme covered area. Such subsequent inclusion of the area within the scheme cannot obviously grant to the petitioner any cause of action to justify their claims for police protection on 22.10.2009 and for a long period of time thereafter. We are satisfied, in these circumstances, that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief. This Writ Petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed, but we may hasten to observe that the right of the petitioners to claim any relief on the basis of subsequent inclusion of the area WPC.30056/09 3 as a scheme covered area shall remain unfettered by the dismissal of this Writ Petition. R.BASANT, JUDGE K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE vgs