IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH JUNE 2010 / 9TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 14756 of 2010(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. K.V.SUBRAMANIAN, PRESIDENT, S.N.EDUCATIONAL & CULTURAL TRUST, CHENTRAPPINNY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. K.A.SUSEELA, PRINCIPAL, S.N.VIDYABHAVAN SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL, CHENTHRAPPINNY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.TPM.IBRAHIM KHAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SUCHIND, SON OF PULLATT NARAYANAN, VALAPPAD VILLAGE & DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK. 2. SURESH, SON OF KOCHUVEETTIL SUBRAMANIAN, KAIPAMANGALAM VILLAGE & DESOM, KODUNGALLUR TALUK. 3. VIKAS, SON OF CHAKKALAKKAL VELUKUTTY, VALAPPAD VILLAGE & DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK. 4. FAISAL, SON OF EDASSERY ABDUL JABBAR, CHOOLOORU DESOM, EDATHIRUTHY VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK. 5. ANVAR, SON OF PUTHIYAVEETTIL MUHAMMED, EDATHIRUTHY VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK. 6. RAGHAVAN, SON OF CHANGARAMKULATH KRISHNANKUTTY NAIR, NATTIKA VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK. 7. MEERA SURESH BABU, WIFE OF VALIPARAMBIL SURESH BABU, MATHILAKAM DESOM, PAPPINIVATTOM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK. 8. SUDHEER, SON OF KOLLARA GOPALAN, EDATHIRUTHY VILLAGE & DESOM, KODUNGALLUR TALUK. 9. SUNIL KUMAR, SON OF THEKKINEDATH NADARAJAN MASTER, VALAPPAD VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK. 10. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KODUNGALLUR IN THRISSUR DISTRICT. 11. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MATHILAKAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 12. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. G.P. SHRI T K VIPINDAS FOR 10-12 ADV. P.S. SREEDHARAN PILLAI - R8, R1-R4, R6, R7 & R9 ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R1-9 SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI FOR R1-9 SRI.C.R.REKHESH SHARMA FOR R1-9 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P1 : A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DT.7.4.2010 OF HIGH COURT IN WRIT PETITION 11846/10 EXT.P2 : A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.NIL DT.29.4.2010 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONERS. EXT.P3 : A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE PRESS STATEMENT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTS 1 TO 9 APPEARED IN MADHYAMAM DAILY DT.27.4.2010. EXT.P4 : A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE PETITION DT.17.4.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS 10 TO 12. EXT.P5 : A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DT.3.5.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT WITH COPY TO R10 & 11. EXT.P6 : PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE RECEIPTS DT.29.5.10 FOR THE PAYMENT OF SCHOOL FEES REMITTED IN THE SCHOOL OFFICE. EXT.P7 : PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING ILLEGAL ENTRY INTO THE SCHOOL COMPOUND, ILLEGAL MEETING AND ALSO THE SITUATION PREVALENT IN THE SCHOOL COMPOUND. EXT.P8: PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE PETITION DT.31.5.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE DY.SUPDT. OF POLICE, IRINJALAKUDA. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : EXT.R8(a): TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT.7.4.2010 IN WP(C) NO.11846/10 EXT.R8(b) : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT.17.5.2010 IN WP(C) 11846 OF 2010. EXT.R8(c): TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DT.29.4.10. EXT.R8(D); TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DT.29.4.10 ISSUED BY THE MANAGEMENT. EXTR8(E) : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DT.2.6.10 ISSUED BY THE MANAGEMENT. K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).No. 14756 of 2010 T - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 30th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT Joseph, J. This Writ Petition is filed seeking police protection. We have already passed interim orders, the last of which is dated 11.6.2010. 2. Today learned counsel for the petitioners points out that at present there is no obstruction. He further submits that in case there is any obstruction, this court may direct that protection will be granted to the petitioners. 3. Learned counsel for the party respondents submits that there are issues relating to issuance of T.C. and a Writ Petition is also pending. 4. We take note of paragraph 3 of the order dt.11.6.2010. We record the submission of the parties that as W.P.(C).No. 14756 of 2010 2 of now there is no obstruction. At the same time, we direct that in case there is any obstruction from respondents 1 to 9 for the smooth functioning of the school, effective protection shall be given by respondents 10 to 12. We make it clear that this order will not stand in the way of respondents 1 to 9 meeting the school authorities during visiting time for any of their grievances. (K. M. JOSEPH) Judge (M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS) Judge tm