IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2011 / 20TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 14734 of 2011(N) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ MOHAMED YOONUS, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.BEERANKUTTY, PATTATHIL HOUSE, CHERIYAMUNDAM AMSOM P.O. THRIKANDIYOOR, TIRUR - 3. BY ADV. SRI.BOBY MATHEW SRI.E.T.MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MALAPPURM. 2. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, TIRUR. 3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TIRUR. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TIRUR. 5. P.K.K.THANGAL, S/O.SAIDU KOYA THANGAL, PADIKATTI HOUSE, THEKENANNARA, TIRUR. 1 6. NAZAR, S/O.ABDULLA, KALADIPARAMBIL, THEKENANNARA, TIRUR. 1 7. SIKHDAR, S/O.AHAMED, KALADIPARAMBIL, THEKENANNARA, TIRUR. 1 8. MOIDEEN BAVA, S/O.HAMSA, KALADIPARAMBIL, THEKENANNARA, TIRUR. 1 9. ABDULLA, S/O.MOIDEENKUTTY, KALADIPARAMBIL, THEKENANNARA, TIRUR. 1 10. MUHAMMED, S/O.MOIDEENKUTTY, KALADIPARAMBIL, THEKENANNARA, TIRUR. 1 R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.M.CHARISMA R5 TO R10 BY ADV. SRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR SRI.HARISH R. MENON THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts 2/- -2- WP(C)NO.14734/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 07/11/2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DY.S.P, TIRUR. P2 COPY OF THE LETTERDATED 11/11/2010 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE K.S.E.B. P3 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 22/01/2011 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE S.I. OF POLICE, TIRUR. P4 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 28/01/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MALAPPURAM. P4(A) COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 28/01/2011 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,TIRUR TO THE PETITIONER. P5 COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 16/02/2011 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C)NO.4867 OF 2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.14734 of 2011-N ***************************** Dated this the 10th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. The petitioner has come to this Court seeking issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to respondents 1 to 4 to afford police protection to the petitioner for the peaceful and unobstructed running of a school by name Moulana Azad Central School, which is being run by a trust, of which the petitioner is the Manager, against any illegal obstruction that may be raised by respondents 5 to 10. 2. The 5th respondent is a local ward councilor. Respondents 6 to 10 are local neighbours. There is a dispute between the petitioner on the one hand and respondents 5 to 10 on the other regarding drawal and charging of electricity line through the property of the petitioner. Ext.P5 interim order has been passed by a learned Judge of this Court restraining the Electricity Board from charging the electricity line already drawn pending disposal of that Writ Petition. The apprehension of the petitioner is that because of the dispute regarding drawal/energising of the electricity line, respondents 5 to 10 may indulge in illegal and W.P(C) No.14734 of 2011-N 2 culpable acts causing obstruction to the peaceful running of the school. 3. Respondents 5 to 10 have entered appearance through counsel. The learned counsel submits that respondents 5 to 10 have no intention whatsoever to cause any obstruction to the peaceful running of the school. It is true that there is a dispute regarding the lines drawn and energising of those lines. The petitioner had raised objection against the same. The matter was talked over and settled. But the petitioner was not abiding by the agreement made by him. That is the real bone of contention. At no point of time respondents 5 to 10 caused any obstruction to the proper and orderly running of the school. In these circumstances, no direction for police protection is liable to be granted, submits the learned counsel for respondents 5 to 10. 4. The learned Government Pleader submits that in the perception of the police officials, there is no threat to the orderly and peaceful running of the school. It is true that there is a dispute between the petitioner and respondents 5 to 10. They have already taken necessary action before this Court and the petitioner has obtained Ext.P5 interim order. If there be any W.P(C) No.14734 of 2011-N 3 illegal obstruction to the peaceful running of the school on the part of respondents 5 to 10 or any other, the petitioner shall be at liberty to complain and the police shall respond adequately to any such genuine complaint received, submits the learned Government Pleader. In these circumstances, the learned Government Pleader also submits that it is not necessary to issue any direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. We have adverted to all the relevant inputs. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for respondents 5 and 6 and the learned Government Pleader we are satisfied that no directions are liable to be issued. 6. Accepting the submissions of the learned Government Pleader and the learned counsel for respondents 5 to 10, this Writ Petition is dismissed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/