IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 31ST JANUARY 2008 / 11TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 873 of 2008(D) ------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------ BIJU JACOB, PROPRIETOR, P T C READYMIX CONCRETE, KINFRA, APPAREL PARK, MENAMKULAM, KAZHAKKOOTTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.) SMT. SARITHA DAVID CHUNKATH SMT. SMITHA GEORGE RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAZHAKKOOTTAM POLICE STATION, KAZHAKKOOTTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE CHUMATTU THOZHILALI CONGRESS(N.C.P) KAZHAKKOOTTAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT PRESIDENT, MR.M.P.SHAJI. 4. THE ALL KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS UNION (A.I.T.U.C), KAZHAKKOOTTAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANDALAM PRESIDENT SRI.NIRMAL KUMAR. 5. THE CHUMATTU THOZHILALI CONGRESS (I.N.T.U.C), KAZHAKKOOTTAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT PRESIDENT SRI.CLARENCE PERERA. 6. THE HEAD LOAD AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION (C.I.T.U), KAZHAKKOOTTAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENOR, MR.RAJU YOHANNAN. 7. KINFRA, APPAREL PARK, MENAMKULAM, KAZHAKKOOTTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. WPC 873/08 BY ADV. SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC 873/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS. EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 5.1.2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R2. EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO.11/2008 DATED 5.1.2008 REGISTERED BY KAZHAKKOTTAM POLICE STATION. RESPONDENTS' EXTS. EXT.R6(a) – RELEVANT PAGE OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING WITH THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS. /TRUE COPY/ K.Balakrishnan Nair & P.N.Ravindran, JJ. ======================== W.P(C).No.873 of 2008 ======================== Dated this the 16th day of January, 2008. ORDER Balakrishnan Nair,J. Heard. The petitioner claims protection for plying his vehicles carrying readymix concrete. According to him, the members of respondents 3 to 6 are causing obstruction to the same at the gate of the industrial unit. The sixth respondent filed a counter affidavit in which it is stated that negotiation is going on between the workmen and the management in the presence of the District Labour Officer concerning the claim for employment by the registered headload workers. 2. Having regard to the facts of the case, if any obstruction is caused to the taking of the vehicles of the petitioner to and from his unit, he may inform the second respondent and in that WP(C) 873/08 -: 2 :- event, the second respondent shall remove the obstruction. This direction is issued without prejudice to the contentions of both sides and the ongoing conciliation proceedings. Post after two weeks in the 500 list. K.Balakrishnan Nair, Judge. P.N.Ravindran, HO. Judge. ess 16/1