IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 17TH OCTOBER 2011 / 25TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 26764 of 2011(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- R.MADHUSOODHANAN,MATTUKKADU HOUSE, KOZHALMANNAM PO, PALAKKAD 678 702. BY ADV. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN SMT.R.PADMAKUMARI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALAKKAD 678 014. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TRAFFIC POLICE STATION,KUNNATHURMEDU, PALAKKAD 678 013. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PUDUNAGARAM,PALAKKAD 678 503. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEMMARA,PALAKKAD 678 508. 5. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PALAKKAD, SOUTH POLICE STATIION, PALAKKAD 678 013. 6. C.RAGHUL,C/O.P.SUNDARAN,GENERAL SECRETARY,PALAKKAD DISTRICT, MOTOR AND AUTORIKSHAW MAZDOOR SANGAM,HARIKKARA STREET, PALAKKAD-1. 7. P.SUNDDARAN,SECRETARY,PALAKKAD DISTRICT MOTOR AND AUTORIKSHAW MAZDOOR SANGAM,HARIKKARA STREET,PALAKKAD-1. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. DINESH MATHEW MANJOORAN FOR R1 TO R5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT DT. 25-2-2009 EXT..P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 4-12-2010 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 27-10-2010 EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 7-1-2011 EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 15-7-2011 EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 1-8-2011 EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DT. 5-9-2011 EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DT. 3-10-2011 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C). No. 26764 of 2011 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of October, 2011 J U D G M E N T Abdul Rehim, J. Petitioner, a stage carriage operator plying his vehicles bearing No. KL 11/P 1183 and KL 9/D-6373 on the routes Palakkad - Nemmara and Olipara - Nemmara - Palakkad, on the strength of a regular permits, is the petitioner. He is seeking directions to respondents 1 to 5 to grant adequate and effective police protection to his life and to the life of his crew in the Buses from being obstructed by respondents 6 and 7 and their sympathisers. 2. Allegation is that the 7th respondent Union is making obstructions to the plying of the stage carriages on the allegation that the petitioner had denied employment to the 6th respondent. The petitioner had produced notices issued by the 7th respondent demanding reinstatement of the 6th respondent. It is also brought to notice that a labour WP(C).26764/11 -2- dispute had already been raised by the 7th respondent before the District Labour Officer, Palakkad and it is under conciliation. Specific incident alleged in the writ petition is that on 26-9-2011, the sympathisers of the 7th respondent along with the 6th respondent had prevented the stage carriage Bus bearing No. KL 11/P 1183 at Palakkad Bus Stand. They attempted to break the front glass of the Bus and also tried to manhandle the petitioner and the crew of the Bus. It is stated that the petitioner was pushed aside and threatened that the other vehicles of the petitioner will also be attacked. According to the petitioner, about the incident Ext.P8 complaint was submitted to respondents 1 to 5, But who since no effective steps were taken to remove such obstruction and to afford protection to the plying of the vehicles. Hence this writ petition is filed. 3. Inspite of service of notice from this court, the respondents 6 and 7 have not chosen to enter appearance WP(C).26764/11 -3- or contest the case. Learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents 1 to 5, on the basis of instructions received from the 5th respondent reported that, there exists a labour dispute which is under conciliation before the District Labour Officer. According to the 5th respondent, he has not received Ext.P8 and that the incident narrated has not been reported to him. 4. From the facts and circumstances as narrated above we notice that there exists a labour dispute regarding the alleged denial of employment to the 6th respondent. It is left open to respondents 6 and 7 to seek appropriate remedy before the competent labour authority regarding the alleged denial of employment. But respondents 6 and 7 or any of their sympathisers have no manner of right to take law into their own hands and to create any obstruction to the plying of vehicles of the petitioner or damage to the vehicles or threat and intimidation to the lives of the WP(C).26764/11 -4- petitioner and his employees. 5. Under such circumstances respondents 1 to 5 are directed to take immediate action if any complaint is received from the petitioner regarding any obstructions or violence from the side of respondents 6 to 7 or anybody claiming under them. It is directed that if there is any threat to the life of the petitioner or his workers, necessary steps shall be taken to afford protection to their lives and for the smooth conduct of the stage carriage operations by the petitioner. (PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) (C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE) ksv/-