IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2011 / 14TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 20917 of 2011(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.J.JOSEPH,PROPRIETOR, KURUSMOOTTIL HOLLOW BRICKS, KUDAMALOOR KARA,AIMANAM VILALGE, KOTTAYAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.SIRAJ KAROLY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM WEST POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KOTTAYAM. 3. GEORGE, S/O.CHANDY,CHAKADAVIL HOUSE, KUDAMALOORE KARA, AIMANOM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM, AIMANOM P.O. ADV. SRI.M.J.THOMAS FOR R3 GOVT. PLEADER SRI. M.R. SABU FOR R1 & R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED FROM THE INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED FROM THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD EXT.P2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE SITE PLAN OF THE INDUSTRIAL UNIT. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 7-5-2011 EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT MADE BY THE PETITIONER TO THE CHIEF MINISTER OF KERALA. (TRUE COPY) PS TO JUDGE. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C). No. 20917 of 2011 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of August, 2011 J U D G M E N T Pius C.Kuriakose, J. This writ petition is instituted by the petitioner who is conducting hollow bricks manufacturing industry in the property belonging to the sister of the third respondent. The complaint of the petitioner is that the first respondent in alliance with the third respondent is harassing him so that the petitioner can be evicted from the property where hollow bricks industry is being conducted, other than through process of law. The learned Government Pleader on instructions submitted that the accusations of harassment levelled against the police are absolutely unfounded. It was the petitioner who approached the police and the police intervened only on the complaint submitted by the petitioner that he is being harassed by the third respondent. The learned counsel for the third respondent Sri.M.J.Thomas WP(C). 20917/11 -2- submitted that there is no attempt either on the part of the third respondent or his sister to evict the petitioner from the property in question other than through due process of law. The real dispute is between the petitioner and another man who is conducting a hotel nearby. The third respondent is unnecessarily being brought on the array of respondents. 2. Having considered the rival submissions including the stand taken by the police, we are of the view that no case is made out for issuance of the direction sought for. The petitioner has already moved the civil court and the civil court has already issued orders restraining the third respondent and his sister from evicting the petitioner. We record the assurance of the third respondent that there is no attempt to evict the petitioner other than through due process of law. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) (C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE) ksv/-