IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 20TH JUNE 2011 / 30TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 15792 of 2011(Y) ------------------------ PETITIONER : --------------------- SIJO ANTONY, S/O.K.J.ANTONY, AGED 30 YEARS, RESIDING AT KANJUPARAMBIL HOUSE, WEST CHENNANKERY P.O., KUTTANAD. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR, OFFICE OF TAHASILDAR, CHANGANACHERY, PIN-686 105. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VAKATHANAM, PIN-686 538. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARUKACHAL, KOTTAYAM, PIN-686 540. 4. SAJI NEERATHUMMUKKIL, NEERATHUMMUKKIL HOUSE, KUTHRAPALLY P.O., KARUKACHAL VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM, PIN-686 540. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. C.M. CHARISMA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 15792 of 2011(Y) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 1.4.11 BY THE PETITIONER TO TAHSILDAR CHANGANACHERY. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 26.5.11 BY THE TAHSILDAR. EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 7.6.11 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE TAHSILDAR. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Mn R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.15792 of 2011-Y ***************************** Dated this the 20th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. The petitioner has come to this Court seeking issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to respondents 2 and 3 to afford police protection to the petitioner for undertaking the activity, which he is permitted to do under Ext.P2 licence granted to him, against any illegal obstruction that is raised by the 4th respondent. 2. According to the petitioner, he is legally entitled to carry out the activity which he is permitted under Ext.P2. The 4th respondent has absolutely no valid justification to raise any obstruction. The petitioner has not been able to undertake the work in view of the illegal obstruction by the 4th respondent. The 4th respondent is said to be an influential political functionary and at his instance obstructions are being raised against the legal activity undertaken by the petitioner, complains the petitioner. 3. Respondent No.4 is served. There is no appearance for him. For respondents 1 to 3, the learned Government W.P(C) No.15792 of 2011-Y 2 Pleader appears. The learned Government Pleader submits that respondents 1 to 3 are satisfied that the petitioner has the legal right to carry out the work as per Ext.P2 and that the 4th respondent has no right to obstruct such activity. The petitioner has complained of such obstruction by the 4th respondent. The learned Government Pleader points out that under Ext.P2, permission granted extends only till 04.06.2011. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner promptly submits that subsequently Ext.P3 application has been filed for extension of time and if not, the petitioner can file a further application for extension of time. It is undertaken that the petitioner shall carry out the activity only as permitted under Ext.P2 and within such time limit as is extended and granted by the 1st respondent. 5. We are satisfied, in these circumstances, that the petitioner can be granted police protection. In the absence of any objection from the 4th respondent and in the light of the submissions made by the learned Government Pleader, we are satisfied that the petitioner is entitled for such protection. 6. In the result: a) This Writ Petition is allowed; W.P(C) No.15792 of 2011-Y 3 b) Respondents 2 and 3 are directed to afford protection to the petitioner to carry out the work as permitted under Ext.P2 within such extended time as is granted to the petitioner to undertake such work by the 1st respondent against illegal obstruction if any raised by the 4th respondent and persons acting under him; c) Needless to say, work will have to be undertaken by the petitioner strictly in accordance with Ext.P2 and subject to securing necessary orders from the 1st respondent to extend the period of time stipulated in Ext.P2. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/