IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD NOVEMBER 2011 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 30823 of 2011(C) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- JAMAL HUSSAIN, DIRSHYAM, CHOLAKKAL HOUSE, EDAVANNA, MALAPPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.S.M.PREM, SMT.K.P.SANTHI, SRI.P.K.NIJOY. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NILAMBUR-679 329. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NILAMBOOR POLICE STATION-679 329. 4. SANTHOSH, SON OF NADICHI, CHERUNNEL, PULLIPADAM, MAMBADU-676 542. 5. ANAKKAPALLI BABU, SON OF JOY, THORAKUNNU, PULLILPADAM, MAMBADU-676 542. 6. SHABARIKKAL PRASANTH KUMAR, SON OF GOPALAN, CHERUNNAL, PULLIPADAM, MAMBADU-676 542. 7. KAKKIRI ABOOBACKER, SON OF MUHAMMED, THORAKKUNNU, PULLIPADAM, MAMBADU-676 542. W.P.(C).NO.30823/2011-C: 8. KARANATH MANSOOR, SON OF MUHAMMED, KIZHAKKETHALA, PULLIPADAM, MAMBADU-676 542. 9. NELLIKUNNATH VIJAYACHANDRAN, SON OF KUMARAN, CHERUNNAL, PULLIPADAM, MAMBADU-676 542. 10. NELLIKUNNATH SUNDARAN, SON OF PARONGADAN, CHERUNNAL, PULLIPADAM, MAMBADU-676 542. 11. KUNNATHODU BASHEER, THORAKUNNU, PULLIPADAM, MAMBADU-676 542. 12. KAKKIRI IBRAHIM, SON OF MUHAMMED, PULLIPADAM, MAMBADU-676 542. 13. NELLIKKUNNATHU MUTHU @ CHANDRAN, SON OF PARONGADAN, PULLIPADAM, MAMBADU-676 542. R1 TO R3 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. M.K. ABOOBACKER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/11/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).NO.30823/2011-C: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 4/10/2011 SUBMITTED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 4/10/2011 SUBMITTED TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR MALAPPURAM. EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 13/11/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 15/11/2011 SUBMITTED BY MUJEEB TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Prv. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K. HARILAL, JJ. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No.30823 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 23rd day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The petitioner, who owns a rubber plantation, complains that there is threat to his life and limbs from respondents 4 to 13 who are workers demanding much higher wages than the wages which are prevalent in the area. According to the petitioner, almost all the workers in his estate are happy with the present rate of wages and are willingly working. But, on account of the threats and obstructions from the part of the party respondents not only the petitioner and his wife, who are the joint owners of the rubber estate, but also even willing workers are afraid. Hence this writ petition seeking directions to respondents 2 and 3 police officers to give adequate police protection to the life of the petitioner and to the lives of the petitioner's family and workers. 2. Even though notice was served on the party respondents through special messenger none of them have chosen to enter WPC.No.30823/2011 2 appearance before this court for resisting the prayers in this writ petition. Thus, all the allegations in the writ petition against the party respondents stand established against them by non traverse. 3. Sri.Nijoy P.K. learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the party respondents are creating trouble not only in the petitioner's estate but also in the nearby estate belonging to one Dr.Joy Thomas. The learned counsel submitted that Dr.Joy Thomas approached this court for police protection against the party respondents and in WP. (C) No.25988/2011 filed by Dr.Joy Thomas this court has issued direction for police protection against the party respondents. A copy of the judgment in W.P. (C) No.25988/2011 was placed before us by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. The learned senior Government Pleader Sri.M.K.Aboobacker submitted that the party respondents are demanding higher wages and the issue as to the correct wages payable to them is being conciliated by the District Labour Officer. If law and order situation arises, the police will not have any hesitation to intervene. WPC.No.30823/2011 3 Having considered the pleadings, the materials and the submissions addressed at the Bar and taking into account the situation that the party respondents are not contesting , we feel that there is warrant for issuance of the protection directions sought for. Hence, we allow this writ petition and direct the respondents 2 and 3 to take such action as is necessary for ensuring that the lives and limbs of the petitioner and members of his family and his willing workers in his rubber plantation are safe from the contumacious acts of the party respondents. The labour disputes as to the wages payable will be resolved by the District Labour Officer who is presently conciliating into the same. The petitioner and the party respondents are directed to co- operate with the proceedings initiated by the District Labour Officer. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE K. HARILAL, JUDGE. dpk WPC.No.30823/2011 4