IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI THURSDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 25TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 16272 of 2010(H) --------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. KURIAN JACOB.A, S/O.A.K.JACOB,AGED 46, ARANGASSERY HOUSE, ERNANELLOOR.P.O, THRISSUR, PIN – 680 501, TEACHER, S.S.M.V.H.S.S, EDAKKAZHIYOOR, CHAVAKKAD. 2. SEBINA BASTIN.A, W/O.KURIAN JACOB, AGED 40, ARANGASSERY HOUSE,ERNANELLOOR.P.O, THRISSUR,PIN-680 501,TEACHER,S.S.M.V. H.S.S,EDAKKAZHIYOOR CHAVAKKAD. BY ADVS. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR, SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE, SRI.P.PRIJITH, SRI.S.VAIDYANATHAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,CHAVAKKAD POLICE STATION,THRISSUR. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHAVAKKAD,THRISSUR. 3. R.P.SIDDIQUE,S/O.LATE R.P.MOIDUTTY, RAYAMMARAKKAR VEETIL PUTHENPURAYIL, R.P.HOUSE, EDAKKARA.P.O, CHAVAKKAD,THRISSUR, MANAGER,S.S.M.V.H.S.S, EDAKKAZHIYOOR.P.O,CHAVAKKAD,THRISSUR. 4. R.P.BASHEER,S/O.LATE R.P.MOIDUTTY, RAYAMMARAKKAR VEETIL PUTHENPURAYIL, R.P.HOUSE,EDAKKARA.P.O,CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR. W.P.(C). NO.16272/2010-H: 5. R.P.HAKKIM,S/O.LATE R.P.MOIDUTTY, RAYAMMARAKKAR VEETIL PUTHENPURAYIL,R.P.HOUSE, EDAKKARA.P.O,CHAVAKKAD,THRISSUR. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. T.K. VIPIN DAS, R3 TO R5 BY ADVS. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED, SRI.T.V.VIJAYARAJAN, SRI.M.SAJJAD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/09/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.16272/2010-H: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 03/12/2008 ISSUED BY THE R.3. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 20/02/2009 ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR, VHSE, TRIVANDRUM. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.6773/2009 DTD. 21/08/2009 ISSUED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 17/02/2010 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 26/03/2010 OF R.3. MANAGER, S.S.M.V.H.S.E, EDAKUZHIYOOR. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 290/2010 OF CHAVAKKAD POLICE STATION. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 06/05/2010 ADDRESSED TO R.3. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD EVIDENCING RECEIPT OF EXT.P.7 BY R.2. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, V.H.S.E. EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE MANAGER DTD. 31/05/2010. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R3.A: COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE P.1. DTD. 19/10/2009. EXT.R3.B: COPY OF THE F.I.R. DTD. 01/04/2010. EXT.R3.C: COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE P.T.A. DTD. 07/05/2010. EXT.R3.D: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE ACQUITTANCE ROLL OF THE SCHOOL DTD. NIL. EXT.R3.E: COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT DTD. NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan & P.Q.Barkath Ali, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.16272 of 2010-H = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 16th day of September, 2010. Judgment Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J. The petitioners are teachers of a vocational higher secondary school. The first petitioner is a Biology teacher. The second petitioner is his wife. The first petitioner teaches the students aspiring to get the qualification in the branch of MLT(Medical Lab Technician) course. There appears to be certain controversies between the petitioners, the teachers and the third respondent Manager of the school in relation to certain disciplinary matters. We do not propose to say anything about that because those are matters which are falling within the parameters of the statutory authorities and would be looked into appropriately. In so far as this writ petition is concerned, the WPC16272/10 -: 2 :- petitioners of whom the second petitioner is the wife of the first petitioner, seek an order of police protection against any illegal actions of respondents 3 to 5. Respondents 4 and 5 are the brothers of Respondent no.3. It appears that a first information report has been registered on the basis of certain allegations made by the petitioners. It is also stated that there are some complaints at the instance of the private respondents also. A crime is registered at their instance also. Investigation of those crimes are matters which have to be taken care of by the appropriate police officers. At the same time, it has to be ensured that there is no law and order problem in relation to the educational establishment which is stated to be a co- educational institution. We do not want to say anything about the allegations made by the rival parties even in relation to the alleged indiscipline by the first petitioner. Yet, we would say that the petitioners as teachers and the third respondent as head of the institution WPC16272/10 -: 3 :- will have to set a pattern of behaviour which will instill confidence in the students so that they would attempt to treat the teachers and the manager as role models to be followed. The police cannot shirk their responsibility, if there is clear evidence on any complaint either way and if there is any threat to the life of the petitioners or respondents 3 to 5, that has to be appropriately taken care of. Under such circumstances, following the interim order dated 27.5.2010, we direct that the police officers will ensure that adequate police protection is provided to the life of the petitioners as also respondents 3 to 5 as and when such need is noticed by the competent among the official respondents. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, Judge. P.Q.Barkath Ali, Judge. Sha/2309