IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS MONDAY, THE 29TH MARCH 2010 / 8TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 7890 of 2010(I) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------------- KRISHNAKUMAR, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI, SREE VALSAM, AMBATTU LANE, EAST KADUNGALLOOR, ALUVA. BY ADV. MR.GEORGE SEBASTIAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, RURAL, ALUVA. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALUVA. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BINANIPURAM. 4. MUKUNDAN, DIRECTOR, SREE SAI VIDYA VIHAR SCHOOL, THIRUVALLOOR, ALANGADU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. T.K. VIPIN DAS, R4 BY MR.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADVS. MR.S.SUJIN, SMT.NITA.N.S. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/03/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.7890/2010-I: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S. 475/2009 OF MUNSIFF COURT, NORTH PARAVOOR. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM APPEARED IN THE HINDU DAILY DTD. 19/02/2010. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM APPEARED IN THE MATHRUBHUMI DAILY DTD. 19/02/2010. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE MASS PETITION DTD. 10/02/2010. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 06/03/2010. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- W.P(C). NO. 7890 OF 2010 I --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th March, 2010 JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph, J. Petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers: “i) Issue a writ of mandamus, order or direction to respondents 2 and 3 and his subordinates not to harass the petitioner and not to compel him to settle the disputes with the fourth respondent. ii) Issue a writ of mandamus, order or direction to respondents 2 and 3 not to interfere in the disputes between the fourth respondent and the petitioner and not to register any false case against the petitioner.” 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner is the father of an eight year old girl who is a student of the School run by the fourth respondent. It is stated that the petitioner enrolled the child in the School believing the WPC.7890/2010 I 2 words of the fourth respondent that it has got CBSE affiliation and NOC from the Government. Exts.P2 and P3 are relied upon to show that there is no CBSE affiliation and NOC from the Government. Petitioner's daughter has filed a Suit against the fourth respondent. The same is pending. Petitioner is the General Secretary of the action council formed by the parents to fight against the illegal activities of the fourth respondent. The parents submitted Ext.P4 representation before the School and a meeting of the parents was scheduled to be held on 13.3.2010. Case of the petitioner is that respondents 2 and 3 Police Officers are siding with the fourth respondent and pressurising the petitioner to settle the issues with the fourth respondent. 3. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent as also the learned Government Pleader. 4. Learned Government Pleader would submit that a Crime has been registered against the petitioner. We make it clear that respondents 1 to 3 are free to investigate the Crime WPC.7890/2010 I 3 registered against the petitioner in accordance with law. But, at the same time, we make it clear that respondents 2 and 3 cannot compel the petitioner to settle the dispute with the fourth respondent. While it may be open to the petitioner as the alleged General Secretary of the Action Council to ventilate their grievance in a manner known to law, if the petitioner commits any offence in the course of doing the same, this Judgment shall not stand in the way of the Police interfering in the matter and taking appropriate action in accordance with law. This Judgment is further conditioned upon the condition that the petitioner shall not interfere with the smooth functioning of the School. This Judgment shall not be understood a charter for the petitioner to obstruct the smooth functioning of the School. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge