IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2011 / 8TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 15399 of 2011(Y) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- XAVIER WILLIAM, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O.THOMAS VAREKKAT, RESIDING AT V/333 B ABRAHAM THARAKAN ROAD, ERAMALLOOR, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.N.C.JOSEPH. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. S.I.OF POLICE, PANANGAD POLICE STATION, MADAVANA, KUMBALAM VILLAGE. 2. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, KOCHI CITY, ERNAKULAM. 3. KUNJUMOHAMMAD MANNATHIPARMABIL S/O.ABDUL KHADER, MANNATHIPARAMBIL, NEAR MARADU VILLAGE OFFICE, NETTOOR P.O., PIN-682 040. 4. ALI MANNATHIPARAMBIL, S/O.ABDUL KHADER, MANNATHIPARAMBIL, PRIYADARSINI ROAD, NETTOOR, PIN-682 040. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. C.M. CHARISMA, R3 & R4 BY ADVS. SRI.A.MOHAMED MUSTAQUE, SRI.K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH). THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/06/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.15399/2011-Y: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX RECEIPT WITH RESPECT TO THE BUILDING X/105 DTD. 18/10/2010 ISSUED BY MARADU GRAMA PANCHAYATH. EXT.P.1.A: COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX RECEIPT WITH RESPECT TO THE BUILDING X/106 DTD. 18/10/2010 ISSUED BY MARADU GRAMA PANCHAYATH. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DT.D 07/01/2011 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.1. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 04/03/2011 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.2. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 18/03/2011 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.1. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R3.A: COPY OF THE INFORMATION GIVEN TO THE PETITIONER FROM VILLAGE OFFICE, MARADU DTD. 17/06/11. EXT.R3.B: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THESE RESPONDENTS BEFORE THE SECRETARY, MARADU GRAMA PANCHAYAT DTD. 28/09/2010. EXT.R3.C: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 01/10/1997 BEFORE THE SECRETARY, MARADU GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.R3.D: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT MADE BY THESE RESPONDENTS BEFORE THE PANANGADU POLICE DTD. 06/06/2011. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- WPC No.15399 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th June, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant, J. The petitioner has come to this Court seeking issue of directions to respondents 1 and 2 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to afford police protection to the petitioner against alleged illegal, culpable and violent conduct on the part of respondents 3 and 4. 2. According to the petitioner, he is a retired engineer aged 63 years wanting to spend his retirement days in charitable activities. He has a building which belongs to him and it is in his possession. He wants to lease out that building to a charitable trust on nominal rent to enable them to undertake charitable activities. They want to run an old age destitute home in the property. Respondents 3 and 4 brothers, who are neighbours of the petitioner, are raising unjustifiable objection/ obstruction to such activity of the petitioner. It is in these circumstances that police protection is claimed. WPC No.15399/2011 2 3. Respondents 3 and 4 have entered appearance through counsel. Counter affidavit has been filed. The learned counsel for respondents 3 and 4 submits that the petition is filed without any bonafides. The petitioner is a defaulter to Government and revenue recovery proceedings are going on against him. He now wants to put up a facade that he is engaged in charitable activities. The building has not been leased to any one to undertake charitable activities. The petitioner has come to this Court with improper motives. He is attempting to construct a latrine trespassing into the property of the party respondents who are his neighbours. Objection was raised against the same. The petitioner's attempt is to get himself armed with an order of police protection so that he can indulge in vexatious conduct with the help of the police. The learned counsel for respondents 3 and 4 points out that both respondents 3 and 4 are persons aged above 70 years. There is no reasonable prospect of respondents 3 and 4 raising any physical objection to any activity of the petitioner. It may be recorded that respondents 3 and 4 undertake that they shall not object to any activity that is carried on in the building belonging WPC No.15399/2011 3 to the petitioner in the property provided such activity does not cause any nuisance to respondents 3 and 4. At the moment, no activity is run and the allegations raised are totally false, submits the learned counsel for respondents 3 and 4. The petitioner may not be permitted to arm himself with an order of police protection which is likely to be misutilised against respondents 3 and 4. In these circumstances, the petition may be dismissed, it is prayed. 4. The learned Government Pleader submits that in the perception of respondents 1 and 2, there is no threat to the life, person or property of the petitioner. There is a civil dispute between them, but that does not in any way amount to threat to the life, person or property of the petitioner. If there be any conduct on the part of respondents 3 and 4 contrary to the undertaking made before this Court, the petitioner can complain and thereupon respondents 1 and 2 shall take necessary action in accordance with law, submits the learned Government Pleader. 5. We take note of the submissions made at the Bar. We are satisfied in these circumstances that no specific directions are necessary under Article 226 of the WPC No.15399/2011 4 Constitution. 6. In the result, a) We accept the undertaking of respondents 3 and 4 that they shall not cause any obstruction or objection to any legal and lawful activity of the petitioner in the property belonging to him. b) We accept the submission of the learned Government Pleader that if there be any action on the part of respondents 3 and 4 contrary to the above undertaking, respondents 1 and 2 shall take appropriate action and afford protection to the petitioner. c) Accepting the above submissions/undertakings, this writ petition is dismissed. R.BASANT JUDGE K.SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE css/ WPC No.15399/2011 5 R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- WPC No.15399 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd June, 2011 WPC No.15399/2011 6 ORDER Basant, J. Respondents 3 and 4 have entered appearance through counsel. Counsel prays for time for filing counter affidavit. File counter affidavit in four days with copy to the counsel for the petitioner. Reply affidavit, if any, to be filed by 28.6.2011. 2. Call on 29.6.2011 finally for hearing and disposal. R.BASANT JUDGE K.SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE css/