IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH OCTOBER 2011 / 20TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 25432 of 2011(D) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- P.A.ABRAHAM, MANAGING PARTNER, PRIYANKA MOTORS, MAKKAMKUNNU, PATHANAMTHITTA P.O., PIN-689 645. BY ADVS. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.P.GOPINATH MENON RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. CENTRAL TRAVANCORE MOTOR & MECHANICAL WORKERS UNION (CITU), REG.NO.575/85, KANNANKARA, H.O.PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689 645, REP. BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY MALAYALAPPUZHA MOHANAN. 2. MAHESH CHANDRAN, VADAKKEPOOVANATHIL, VETTOOR P.O., KUMBAZHA, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 653. 3. SANTHOSHKUMAR P.S.,PATHALAYIL HOUSE, VETTOOR P.O., KUMBAZHA, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 653. 4. ABHILASH S., SHALINI NIVAS, MANNANMULLOOR, ELANTHOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA-689 643. 5. CHANDRA MOHAN, THEKKEL KIZHAKKETHIL, MEENADAM P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 516. 6. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 645. 7. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,PATHANAMTHITTA-689 645. 8. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 645. R1 TO R5 BY ADV. SRI.T.P.PRADEEP FOR R6 TO R8 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.T.LILLY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.25432/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE LIST OF MEMBERS SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNION P2 COPY OF THE CHARTER OF DEMAND DATED 4/7/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P3 COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT DATED 25/8/2011. P4 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 15/9/2011 GIVEN BY NAVEEN INDUS MOTORS, PATHANAMTHITTA. P5 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 14/9/2011 GIVEN BY RANJAN RAJAI. P6 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 07/09/2011 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA. P7 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 17/09/2011 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA. P8 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 20/9/2011 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA. P9 COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 19/09/2011 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R1(A) COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 29/09/2011 SWORN BY RANJU RAJAN, THE CUSTOMER MENTIONED IN EXHIBIT P5. /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO.JUDGE sts PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C). No. 25432 of 2011 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of October, 2011 J U D G M E N T Pius C.Kuriakose, J. In this writ petition under Article 226 the petitioner who is conducting service centre for automobiles, seeks police protection for the working of the service centre free from obstructions by 1st respondent union and respondent Nos. 2 to 5 who are members of the said union. The party respondents have filed a detailed counter affidavit where they allege that the allegations levelled in the writ petition that the party respondents are obstructing the functioning of the service centre of the petitioner have been levelled with oblique motives. They are untrue allegations. In paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit it is stated as follows: “It is submitted that there is no law and order problem and these respondents are not causing any obstruction to the functioning of petitioner's firm.” Shri Benny P. Thomas, learned counsel for the petitioner WP(C).25432/11 -2- submits that in spite of what is contended by the party respondents the truth is that the petitioner is not in a position to conduct service centre peacefully on account of troubles created by the party respondents. He drew our attention to Exts.P4 and P5 complaints submitted by the petitioner's customers. 2. Smt. K.T. Lilly, learned Government Pleader on the basis of instructions received from the police submitted that the police conducted an enquiry and in the enquiry the party respondents assured the police that they will not cause any trouble to the working of the petitioner's service centre. We record the submissions of the Government Pleader. 3. We dispose of the writ petition with a direction that if in future any complaint is received from the petitioner of any trouble from the party respondents or anybody owing allegiance to them, prompt enquiry shall be conducted and if the enquiry reveals that there is trouble to the working of WP(C).25432/11 -3- the petitioner's service centre the police shall take prompt action to ensure that the petitioner's service centre functions smoothly. (PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) (C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE) ksv/-