IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH MARCH 2011 / 25TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 7189 of 2011(W) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. BHARTI AXA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. IST FLOOR, GAURI NARAYAN, NEAR SHENOYS THEATRE, M.G.ROAD, COCHIN -35, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSOCIATE VICE PRESIDENT HR (SOUTH) MR.AMAL ANAND. 2. MR. AMAL ANAND, ASSOCIATE VICE PRESIDENT HR (SOUTH) BHARTI AXA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. IST FLOOR, GAURI NARAYAN, NEAR SHENOYS THEATRE, M.G.ROAD, COCHIN -35. BY ADVS. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.P.GOPINATH RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. C.S.VINOD, SECRETARY, NEW GENERATION BANKS & INSURANCE EMPLOYEES UNION (AITUC) NEAR PADMA THEATRE, FLOWER JUNCTION, PUTHENCHAL ALI MUHAMMED BUILDING, JEWS STREET, ERNAKULAM KOCHI 682 035. 2. SHAJIL KUMAR, BIJU BHAVAN, NARAKKODE, KEEZHARIYUR PO, KOZHIKODE 673 321. 3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (LAW & ORDER) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, KOCHI CITY, ERNAKULAM 682 011. 5. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CENTRA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM KOCHI 682 031. 6. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, KOZHIKODE 673 001. 7. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE WEST NADAKKAVU POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE 673 001. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. T.K. VIPINDAS R1 &2 BY ADVS. SRI.K.R.VINOD SRI.K.V.ARUN KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: SMT R. BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 7189 of 2011-W ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant,J. The petitioners - an insurance company and its Associate Vice President, have come to this Court with this petition under Art.226 of the Constitution seeking issue of directions to respondents 3 to 7 to afford police protection to the petitioners against wanton, culpable and contumacious acts on the part of respondents 1 and 2. 2. According to the petitioners, the 2nd respondent was appointed in the managerial cadre of the 1st respondent. His services have been terminated. Respondents 1 and 2, out of ill- will and malice arising out of such termination, are attempting to vex and harass the petitioners. They are indulging in and threatening to indulge in violent acts against the petitioners. It W.P.(C) No. 7189 of 2011 -: 2 :- is, in these circumstances, that the petitioners have come to this Court with this petition. 3. Respondents 1 and 2 have appeared through counsel. The learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 submits that respondents 1 and 2 have no intention of causing any threat to the life or person of the petitioners or other officers of the company. According to respondents 1 and 2, the 2nd respondent is the Sales Manager of the 1st petitioner - company. His services have been terminated unjustifiably by the 1st petitioner. Admittedly, he is not an industrial worker. Respondents 1 and 2 have grievances against such termination; but they have no intention whatsoever to obstruct the working of the 1st petitioner company or in any way threatening the life or person of the 2nd petitioner or other officials. 4. The learned Government Pleader submits that necessary police protection shall be afforded if there is any threat to the life or person of the petitioners from respondents 1 and 2. It shall also be ensured that there is no illegal interference with the peaceful and orderly functioning of the 1st petitioner company. 5. Though respondents 1 and 2 assert that they have no intention to interfere in the working of the company or to cause any threat to the person or life of the petitioners, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that after filing of this W.P.(C) No. 7189 of 2011 -: 3 :- petition also there has been an incident in which the wife of the 2nd petitioner at Hydrabad has been threatened by the persons who, it is apprehended, were acting at the behest of the party respondents herein. Necessary complaints shall be filed and those complaints shall be pursued separately, submits the learned counsel for the petitioners. 6. We have considered all relevant inputs. We are satisfied that the petitioners are entitled to succeed. We are further satisfied that appropriate directions deserve to be issued. 7. In the result: (a) This writ petition is allowed. (b) Respondents 3 to 7 are directed to afford adequate police protection to the petitioners for the peaceful and orderly running of the 1st petitioner - company and to provide protection for the person and life of the 2nd petitioner. It shall be specifically ensured that there is no obstruction to the ingress and egress to the 1st petitioner - company by respondents 1 and 2. Sd/- R. BASANT (Judge) Sd/- K. SURENDRA MOHAN (Judge) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge