IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH MARCH 2011 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 4634 of 2011(D) --------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- M/S.MARDEC.R.K.LATEX PVT.LTD., VADAPURAM P.O., NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA-676 562, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMPANY SECRETARY - MR. THOMAS K. BY ADVS. SRI.JOSEPH MARKOSE, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.JOSEPH KODIANTHARA, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS SRI.MATHEWS K.UTHUPPACHAN SRI.BINU MATHEW SRI.TERRY V.JAMES SRI.B.J.JOHN PRAKASH SRI.TOM THOMAS (KAKKUZHIYIL) RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MALAPPURAM-679 005. 2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM-679 322. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NILAMBUR-679 329. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NILAMBUR-679 329. 5. MR. SHARAFUDHEEN, AGED 32 YEARS, CONVENER, ACTION COUNCIL, AMBALATHODIKAYIL HOUSE, TANA, MAMPAD P.O., NILAMBUR-676 542. 6. MR. P.ABDUL KARIM, S/O. KOYAMU KURIKKAL, PUNNAPPALA HOUSE, MEPPADAM P.O., MAMPAD, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 542. ...2/- WP(C).No. 4634 of 2011(D) -2- 7. A. SAWAD, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O. HAMEED, ALLIPRA HOUSE, BEEMBUNGAL, MAMPAD P.O., NILAMBUR-676 542. 8. P.T.MOHAMMED ALI, AGED 48 YEARS, PANAYAMTHODIKA HOUSE, S/O. BEERAN, BEEMBUNGAL, MAMPAD P.O., NILAMBUR-676 542. 9. P.T.AHMED KUTTY NEYKON, AGED 55 YEARS, PALLIKATHODIKA HOUSE, TANA, MAMPAD P.O., NILAMBUR-676 542. 10. PALADAN MOHAMMED ALI @ MANU, AGED 36 YEARS, TANA, MAMPAD P.O., NILAMBUR-676 542. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. CHARISMA R6 BY ADV. SRI.V.RAJENDRAN R5 & R7 TO R10 BY ADV. SRI.P.SAMSUDIN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 4634 of 2011(D) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF FACTORY LICENCE DATED 18-11-2008. EXT.P2 : COPY OF LICENCE DATED 2-5-2007 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY, MAMPAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT UNDER SECTIONS 232, 233, 234 AND 254 AND RELEVANT RULES UNER THE KERALA PANCHAYAT RAJ ACT. EXT.P3 : COPY OF CONSENT ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD ALONG WITH A LETTER DATED 3-12-2008. EXT.P4 : COPY OF CONSENT DATED 16-12-2009 ISSUED BY THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD. EXT.P5 : COPY OF INTERIM ORDER DATED 10-12-2009 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C) NO. 35701/2009. EXT.P5(a) : COPY OF JUDGMENT DTD 18-1-2010 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C) NO. 35701/2009. EXT.P6 : COPY OF NOTICE DATED 8-12-2009 ISSUED BY THE MAMPAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.P7 : COPY OF REPLY DATED 11-12-2009 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P8 : COPY OF CONTRACT DATED 13-5-2009 BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND M/S. KERALA ENVIRO INFASTRUCTURE LIMITED. EXT.P9 : COPY OF ORDER NO. 3125/2009 DATED 4-1-2010 OF THE MAMPAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.P10 : COPY OF LETTER DATED 24-12-2009 OF THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD. EXT.P11 : COPY OF REPORT DATED 15-12-2009 OF THE MEDICAL OFFICER, PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, MAMPAD. EXT.P12 : COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 12-8-2010 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C) NO. 20747/2010. EXT.P13 : COPY OF LETTER DATED 17-1-2011 SENT BY THE PETITIOENR TO THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE WITH COPY TO RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3. Contd... WP(C).No. 4634 of 2011(D) EXT.P14 : COPY OF LETTER DATED 7-2-2011 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH COPY TO THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, TRIVANDRUM AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (NORTH ZONE), CALICUT. EXT.P15 : COPY OF PHOTOGRAPH OF THE BANNER. EXT.P16 : COPY OF COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY CERTAIN WORKERS OF THE PETITIONER'S FACTORY TO CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NILAMBUR. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R7(a) : COPY OF LICENSE ISSUED BY THE MAMPAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT TO THE PETITIONER COMPANY. EXT.R7(b) : COPY OF THE ANALYSIS REPORT DATED 28-06-03 OF THE ASSISTANT ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, MALAPPURAM IN RESPECT OF THE SAMPLES TAKEN FROM PETITIONER'S COMPANY. EXT.R7(c) : COPY OF THE ANALYSIS REPORT DATED 24-1-04 OF THE ASSISTANT ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, MALAPPURAM IN RESPECT OF THE SAMPLES TAKEN FROM PETITIONER'S COMPANY. EXT.R7(d) : COPY OF THE ANALYSIS REPORT DATED 14-2-06 OF THE ASSISTANT ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, MALAPPURAM IN RESPECT OF THE SAMPLES TAKEN FROM PETITIONER'S COMPANY. EXT.R7(e) : COPY OF THE ANALYSIS REPORT DATED 23-08-2006 OF THE ASSISTANT ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, MALAPPURAM IN RESPECT OF THE SAMPLES TAKEN FROM PETITIONER'S COMPANY. EXT.R7(f) : COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 30-12-2009 OF THE COMMITTEE CONSTITUTED BY THE MAMPAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH. EXT.R7(g) : COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 29-5-2010 IN APPEAL NO. 153/2010. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn R.BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO: 4634 OF 2011 D ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th March, 2011. JUDGMENT Basant, J. Petitioner has come to this Court again seeking issue of directions to respondents 1 to 4 under Art.226 of the Constitution to afford police protection to the petitioner for the peaceful running of his rubber factory against illegal objections/obstructions raised by and apprehended from respondents 5 to 10. 2. According to the petitioner he is duly licenced to runhis rubber factory. There were illegal objections and obstructions earlier and this obliged the petitioner to come to this Court with WPC 35701/2009. Interim directions were granted by the court but in the meantime the grama panchayath revoked the licence granted to the petitioner to run the factory. In these circumstances WPC 35701/2009 was closed. The cancellation of licence was challenged before the Tribunal for self government institutions but the said challenge was turned down by the Tribunal. The petitioner came to this Court and vide Ext.P12 WPC 4634/2011 2 judgment passed by another Bench (single bench) in WPC 20747/2010 the said licence has been restored. The petitioner is now running the factory on the strength of Ext.P12 judgment. But illegal obstructions are raised by respondents 5 to 10. It is in these circumstances that petitioner has come to this Court seeking renewed directions of police protection. 3. Respondents 5 to 10 have entered appearance through two counsel. Counsel raised identical contentions. It is submitted that respondents 5 to 10 have no intention to physically obstruct or object to the running of the factory. They are holding peaceful demonstrations as they apprehend that the running of the factory might cause environmental hazards to them. It is further submitted that Ext.P12 judgment has been challenged before the Division Bench by some of the aggrieved persons including respondents 5 and 7. The appeal has been admitted by the Division Bench but admittedly Ext.P12 judgment has not been stayed. Their right to peaceful demonstration against the running of the factory may be recognised. It may be recorded that respondents 5 to 10 have no intention to cause any culpable obstruction to the running of the factory. WPC 4634/2011 3 4. The learned Govt. Pleader after taking instruction submits that the interim order issued by this Court on 14-2-2011 is being enforced effectively by the police. Sufficient police men have been placed in view of the history of this proceedings. 4. We are satisfied in these circumstances that this writ petition can be allowed and appropriate directions issued to respondents 1 to 4. We make it clear that the petitioner can run the factory only if he has a licence issued in accordance with law. If he has such licence as he presently has, respondents 1 to 4 shall afford adequate police protection for the peaceful running of the factory of the petitioner against any illegal obstruction that may be caused by respondents 5 to 10. Needless to say this direction shall be subject to any orders that may be passed in the writ appeal pending against Ext.P12 judgment i.e W.A.274/2011. R.BASANT Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj WPC 4634/2011 4