IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE 9TH AUGUST 2007 / 18TH SRAVANA 1929 WP(C).No. 19460 of 2007(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ JOHNY.P.MATHEW, MANAGING DIRECTOR, M/S.TAMGJ TRAVELS (PVT) LIMITED, NADUVILEMURIYIL BUILDINGS, KOZHENCHERRY P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.O.V.MANIPRASAD SRI.GEORGE G.POOTHICOTE RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ARANMULA POLICE STATION, ARANMULA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 3. AKBAR TRAVELS OF INDIA (PVT)LTD., KOTTAYAM BRANCH, GEETHA TRADE CENTRE, M.C.ROAD, NAGAMBODAM, KOTTAYAM REPRESENTED BY IT'S MANAGER. 4. VIPIN, AKBAR TRAVELS OF INDIA (PVT) LTD., KOTTAYAM BRANCH, GEETHA TRADE CENTRE, K.C.ROAD, NAGAMBODAM, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.BIMAL K.NATH SRI.S.JAMAL SRI.E.M.SUNIL KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 9/08/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.19460 of 2007 - N ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 9th day of August, 2007 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner has approached this court seeking for the following reliefs: “i) Issue a writ of mandamus, direction, order or any other appropriate writ directing 2nd respondent to provide adequate and sufficient police protection to the conduct of the business of travel agency of the petitioner at 2/873A, Naduvilemuriyil Buildings, Kozhencherry Grama Panchayat, Kozhencherry P.O. without causing any obstruction by the 3rd and 4th respondents and their men. ii) Issue a writ of mandamus, direction, order directing 2nd respondent to give adequate protection to the life and person of the petitioner, his family members and the employees of his business firm from the 3rd and 4th respondents and their men.” 2. Respondents 3 and 4 through counsel submitted that they will not cause any obstruction to the running of the business of the petitioner or harm him or his family members or his employees. This submission is recorded and the writ petition is closed. If the above undertaking is violated, the petitioner can move the police and the police will take appropriate action in accordance with law. K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR JUDGE HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE.