IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 18TH JULY 2011 / 27TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 18441 of 2011(E) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. ING VYSYA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. NO.40/9651, IST FLOOR, PRABHU TOWERS, M.G. ROAD, COCHIN-682 035, REPRESENTED BY ITS VICE PRESIDENT MR.BALAKRISHNAN. 2. MR.BALAKRISHNAN V., VICE PRESIDENT, ING VYSYA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED NO.40/9651, IST FLOOR, PRABHU TOWERS, M.G. ROAD, COCHIN-682 035. BY ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR, SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR, SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI, SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS, SRI.P.GOPINATH. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, COCHIN CORPORATION, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 031. 3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL POLICE, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 018. WP(C).No. 18441 of 2011(E) 4. NEW GENERATION BANKS & INSURANCE EMPLOYEES UNION (AITUC) STATE COMMITTEE OFFICE, 5TH FLOOR, DIVANS ARCADE, DIVANS ROAD, NEAR LAKSHMI HOSPITAL, COCHIN-682 017, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY MR.C.S. VINOD. 5. MR.AJITH ARAVIND, DISTRICT SECRETARY, NEW GENERATION BANKS & INSURANCE EMPLOYEES UNION (AITUC), STATE COMMITTEE OFFICE, 5TH FLOOR, DIVANS ARCADE, DIVANS ROAD, NEAR LAKSHMI HOSPITAL, COCHIN-682 017. 6. MR.SUBIN RAJ, SUBIN NIVAS, PRIYADARSINI NAGAR, THEVARA P.O., KOCHI-682 013. 7. MR.ANTONY MILTON, VELIYIL HOUSE, KUMBALANGI POST, KOCHI-682 007. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.CHARISMA. R4 TO R7 BY ADV. SRI.K.R.VINOD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 18441 of 2011(E) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE POSTERS AFFIXED BY RESPONDENTS 4 TO 7. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE PAMPHLET PUBLISHED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE EMPLOYEES OF THE PETITIONER TO THE MANAGING DIRECTOR AND C.E.O. OF THE 1ST PETITIONER COMPANY ON 30/06/2011. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 30/06/2011 ADDRESSED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 30/06/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.18441 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Abdul Rehim, J. The 1st petitioner is a public limited company engaged in providing life insurance. The 2nd petitioner is the Vice President of the 1st petitioner company. Petitioners are seeking police protection to the properties of the 1st petitioner, its employees and functioning at their office at Kochi and at other branches, from being not obstructed, threatened and intimidated by respondents 4 to 7 or their supporters or persons acting on their behalf. 2. By virtue of an interim order issued on 11.7.2011 a direction was issued by this Court to respondents 2 and 3 to afford adequate police protection for the petitioners, its employees and officers, so as to ensure smooth functioning. It was directed that the respondents 2 and 3 should ensure W.P.(C).18441/11 -2- that no obstruction is caused by respondents 4 to 7 or men acting under them to the free ingress and egress of staffs and officers of petitioners who have not joined the strike and also to the customers of the 1st petitioner company. 3. Today, when the matter was taken up, Sri. K.R. Vinod, learned counsel appearing for respondents 4 to 7 submitted that they are only demonstrating peacefully outside the office premises of the 1st petitioner company and that they have no intention to cause any sort of obstruction to the normal functioning of the company or to the ingress and egress to its offices and branches. 4. The above submission is recorded and we are inclined to make the interim order absolute. It is made clear that if there is any violation of the undertaking made and if the respondents 4 to 7 or anybody claiming under them is causing any sort of obstruction or nuisance to the normal functioning of the 1st petitioner company, adequate steps for removing such obstruction shall be taken by W.P.(C).18441/11 -3- respondents 2 and 3, and that protection should be afforded to ensure smooth functioning of the offices and branches of the 1st petitioner company. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb