IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2008 / 21ST SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 19194 of 2008(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- M/S. CHICAGO BUILDERS & REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD., CHICAGO PLAZA, 4TH FLOOR, RAJAJI ROAD, KOCHI-35, REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE KOCHI CORPORATION, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OFFICE, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-11. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, KOCHI CITY, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31. 3. THE NEW GENERATION BANK & INSURANCE EMPLOYEES' UNION (CITU), MARUTHI VILAS, CANNON SHED ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-11, REP. BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY. 4. MR. AZEEM S DEEN, EX-EMPLOYEE, AVIVA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PVT. LTD., C/O. NEW GENERATIOIN BANK & INSURANCE EMPLOYEES' UNION, MARUTHI VILAS, CANNON SHED ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-11. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.VINOD FOR R3,4 SRI.S.RAMESH BABU, SC FOR R1 GOVT.PLEADER SRI.K.V.MANOJ KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.19194/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE WRITE UP APPEARED IN THE METRO MANORAMA DATED 18.6.2008. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 10.6.2008 BEFORE THE AREA SECRETARY OF THE PARTY. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 18.6.2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 18.6.2008 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE. EXTS. OR R3 AND R4 EXT.R4(a): TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE ASST.COMMISSIONER OF PLICE FOR the USE OF LOUD SPEAKERS. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 19194 OF 2008 I ==================== Dated this the 12th day of August, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the owner of a commercial building known as Chicago Plaza situated in Rajaji Road, Ernakulam. In this writ petition, the complaint is regarding a shed constructed by the 3rd respondent union, which is exposing the cause of the 4th respondent, whose services were terminated by his employer a lessee in the building in question. According to the petitioner, by constructing a shed in the car parking area of the petitioner's building and using mike and loud speakers, an agitation is being carried on by the 3rd respondent, and language used which is described to be most objectionable. Petitioner submits that he has moved the Corporation by filing Ext.P3 and also the Commissioner of Police, Kochi by filing Ext.P4. It is stated that neither the Corporation nor the Commissioner has taken any action for remedying the situation and therefore this writ petition is filed. 2. The 3rd respondent and 4th respondent appears through counsel and as usual, submits that they are holding a peaceful agitation against the employer of the 4th respondent without using any loud speaker WPC 19194/08 :2 : or causing nuisance to anyone of the occupants of the building belonging to the petitioner. They are also relying on Ext.R4(a) permit granted by the police. The Corporation would submit that respondents 3 and 4 had not obtained any permit from them for constructing the shed. It is stated that coming to know of the existence of the shed, they have issued a notice requiring respondents 3 and 4 to remove the same. It is stated that despite this, the shed has not been removed and that further action is being contemplated. 3. Two things are evident from the facts. That there is an agitation going on and a shed has been constructed by the 3rd respondent. It is also clear that the 3rd respondent has not obtained any permit from the Corporation. The period during which the loud speakers were permitted by Ext.R4(a) also has expired on 27/6/2008. 4. Though this Court cannot stand in the way of the respondents 3 and 4 from continuing their agitation in exposing cause of the 4th respondent, at the same time, this Court cannot recognise the existence of an unauthorised structure against which the Corporation has already initiated action. Therefore, the action having been initiated by the Corporation, the Corporation is bound to continue the same and take it to WPC 19194/08 :3 : its logical conclusions. This the Corporation shall do, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 2 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. 5. Admittedly, the period of Ext.R4(a) permit has expired and without obtaining the permit, the 3rd respondent cannot use it. In case the 3rd respondent uses loud speakers without a permit or in violation of the conditions subject to which permit is granted, it will be open to the petitioner to move the Commissioner of Police, in which case, the said Officer shall take appropriate action to remedy the grievance of the petitioner. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp