IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH JANUARY 2010 / 23TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 863 of 2010(G) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- TOUGHGLASS INDIA PVT.LTD, INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA, EDAYAR, BINANIPURAM-683 502, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY ADV. MR.PEEYUS A.KOTTAM. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BINANIPURAM POLICE STATION, BINANIPURAM, EDAYAR. 2. KERALA HEAD LOAD AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION(CITU), BINANIPURAM.P.O,EDAYAR UNIT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN- 683 502. 3. KERALA HEAD LOAD AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION(BMS), BINANIPURAM.P.O. EDAYAR UNIT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN- 683 502. 4. KERALA HEAD LOAD AND GENERAL WORKERS UNION(AITUC), BINANIPURAM.P.O, EDAYAR UNIT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN -683 502. R1 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT. M.K. PUSHPALATHA, R2 BY ADV. MR.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/01/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.863/2010-G: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 08/01/2010 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE R.1. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE RECEIPT DTD.08/01/2010 ISSUED BY R.1. TO PETITIONER SHOWING RECEIPT OF EXT.P.1. REPRESENTATION. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. P.R.RAMAN & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= W.P.(C) No. 863 of 2010 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 13th day of January, 2010 JUDGMENT Raman, J. Notice served on the party respondents to Special Messenger. 2. The petitioner is a Private Ltd. Company which is proposing to start a factory and building. Loading and unloading work of the goods at the time of construction of the building is entrusted to respondents 3 and 4 and other civil matter is entrusted to general workers with the choice of the petitioner. According to him, respondents 2 to 4 are insisting for the civil works to be alloted them and causing obstruction. 3. The 2nd respondent entered appearance through the counsel and submitted that they will not insist for giving any civil work to them and since they are already given work pertaining to loading and unloading of building materials. W.P.(C) No. 863/2010 2 Accordingly, submission that they will not be insisting for any civil work to be done in the premises as alleged, is recorded. 4. In the facts and circumstances, there will be a direction that in case any obstruction is caused insisting for any civil work, such obstruction will be removed by the 1st respondent by giving effective police protection. The writ petition is accordingly closed. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE. mn.