IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN MONDAY, THE 6TH OCTOBER 2008 / 14TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 13501 of 2008(G) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------------- SURYA SAMUDRA HOLIDAY RESORT PRIVATE LIMITED, PULINKUDI, MULLOOR P.O., CHOWARA, VIZHINJAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER, SRI.NAGARAJAN UDUPA. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN SRI.T.C.KRISHNA RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIZHINJAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIZHINJAM POLICE STATION, VIZHINJAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. TRIVANDRUM HEAD LOAD AND GENERAL WORKERS' UNION (CITU), DESHABHIMANI ROAD, MELE THAMPANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1, REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT GENERAL SECRETARY. 5. HOTEL AND RESTAURANT EMPLOYEES' SENA (BKS), VADAKKENADA, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-23, REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT SECRETARY. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BENJAMIN PAUL – R1 TO R3 ADV. SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.13501/2008 G APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF TERMINATION LETTER DTD. 28/03/08 ISSUED BY M/S. TROILUS HOSPITALITY PRIVATE LIMITED. EXT.P2: COPY OF NOTICE DTD. 10/04/08 ISSUED TO MR.ANIKUTTAN S.S, ONE OF THE EMPLOYEES OF THE PETITIONER ESTABLISHMENT ALONG WITH STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS. EXT.P3: COPY OF FILED A COMPLAINT OF 11/04/08 BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF COMPLAINT DTD. 16/04/08 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & V.K.MOHANAN, JJ. ----------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.13501 OF 2008 G ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 6th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2008 J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. This Court on 25.4.2008 ordered police protection for renovation of the resort complex of the petitioner. The petitioner has decided to close down the establishment and entrust it to another firm to run it. It has issued notice of retrenchment to all the workmen. Along with the notice, statutory payments are also offered. The petitioner prays, the interim order passed by this Court may be made absolute. 2. The 4th respondent submits, the petitioner was engaging about 100 workmen, of which 88 persons were working since 1985. Now, on a fine morning, the unit has been closed down. They submit, they have raised a dispute regarding the denial of employment to them before the Conciliation Officer. But, the petitioner is not co- operating with the conciliation machinery. 3. Having regard to the facts of the case, it is ordered that, if the renovation work of the petitioner's unit is obstructed by any one, the petitioner may move the police. In that event, the police shall remove the obstruction. But, this order will not enable the petitioner W.P.(C)No.13501/08 -2- to get police protection to run the unit. Further, the above direction is subject to the condition that the petitioner shall co-operate with the conciliation machinery. In other words, the petitioner shall ensure representation of the competent officer of it in the conciliation conferences so that the parties can have meaningful negotiation and settle the matter. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE. dsn