IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS MONDAY, THE 15TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 26TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 1198 of 2010(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.BALASUBRAMANIAN, AGED 62 YEARS, SON OF MANNARSAMY CHETTIAR, 5/668, MANALI ROAD, PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY HIS SISTER AND POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, M.SARASWATHY, AGED 50 YEARS WIFE OF JALANTHAR, 5/668,MANALI ROAD,PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.H.B.SHENOY SRI.B.ASHOK SHENOY SMT.LAKSHMI B.SHENOY SRI.ABU MATHEW SRI.SOBHAN GEORGE SRI.K.V.GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PALAKKAD TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION,PALAKKAD 2. PALAKKAD DISTRICT MOTOR THOZHILALI UNION (CITU),REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,M.S.SKARIA, BEHIND MUNICIPAL BUS STAND,METTUPALAYAM STREET, PALAKKAD.P.O. 3. JOBI,S/O.MATHAI, MULLENPOTTAKAYIL, KARIMPA.P.O,MANNARKKAD.P.O,PALAKKAD. 4. RAJENDRAN S/O.RAMASWAMY,VELLULLI VEEDU, KALLADIKODE.P.O,PALAKKAD DISTRICT. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SHRI. T.K. VIPIN DAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT. P1 TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DT.11.1.2010 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER TO 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF FIR DT.11.1.2010 IN CRIME NO. 26 OF 2010 OF PALAKKAD TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION, EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DT.12.1.2010 SUBMITTED BY MOHAMMED BASHEER & 11 OTHERS. /TRUE COPY/ K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).No. 1198 of 2010 Y - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT Joseph, J. This writ petition is filed for a direction to the first respondent to afford adequate and effective police protection to the petitioner, their workmen for operating the petitioner's stage carriage buses bearing Reg. No. KL 9/V- 7477, KL 9/K- 1296 and KL 9/X-1220 and to prevent all obstructions caused by respondents 2 to 4 and their men. 2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows. Petitioner is the owner of three stage carriages. Being a sickly person, he has entrusted the business to his sister, who is his Power of Attorney holder. It is stated that though 12 W.P.(C).No. 1198 of 2010 2 workers are required to ply the aforesaid buses, the second respondent union had imposed about 32 workers in all in the petitioner's three stage carriages taking undue advantage of the petitioner's sister. The above said 32 workers are being engaged batch by batch in turns. It is further stated that the workers are being paid wages at the rate of 7% of the daily collection to the Drivers and 5% each to the Conductors, Writers/Checkers and Cleaners and also Rs. 100/- per day towards washing the vehicles. In view of the fact that the petitioner and his sister have nobody to look after the business, they had conceded to the aforesaid introduction of workers by the second respondent. 3. From 11.1.2010 onwards the second respondent Union, along with a group of people under the leadership of respondents 3 and 4, who are two among the 32 workers engaged by the second W.P.(C).No. 1198 of 2010 3 respondent, obstructing the plying of the vehicles under the premise of labour problems without issuing any notice of strike or without putting forth any demand. Though the other Drivers, Conductors, Checkers and Cleaners out of the 32 workers are ready and willing to operate the buses, and more so 12 of them, who are not members of any union, the second respondent, along with respondents 3 and 4 are obstructing the petitioner from conducting the services. 4. This Court passed an interim order granting protection to the petitioner to ply the buses with the willing workers, but not by engaging any outsiders. 5. Though served, there is no appearance for respondents 2 to 4. 6. In such circumstances, we make the interim order absolute. We further make it clear that this will not stand in the W.P.(C).No. 1198 of 2010 4 way of respondents 2 to 4 or any of the workers for that matter taking up the matter before appropriate authority as per law. 7. This writ petition is accordingly closed. (K. M. JOSEPH) Judge (M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS) Judge tm