IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 27TH MARCH 2009 / 6TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 8900 of 2009(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JUDOZ GONSALVAZ, PARAMBIL HOUSE, PAYYAPPALLY ROAD, DON BOSCO, VADUTHALA P.O., KOCHI-27. BY ADV. SRI.P.SAM ZACHARIAH SRI.K.S.SAJEEV KUMAR SMT.LAJI SAM ZACHARIAH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VARAPUZHA. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARAVOOR. 3. I N T U C UNION(AFFILIATION NO.9833), RAJEEV BHAVAN, VYAPARA BHAVAN, PARAVOOR MEKHALA COMMITTEE, PARAVOOR, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT RASHID KODIYAN. 4. C I T U UNION(REGISTRATION NO.160/86), KANARAN MANDIRAM, PARAVOOR MEGHALAOFFICE, CANAL ROAD, NORTH PARAVOOR, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY K.M.SEBASTIAN. 5. B.M.S. UNION(HEAD LOAD WORKERS), ERNAKULAM DISTRICT NIRMANA THOZHILALI SANGHAM, I.S.PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-18, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, KAMALADHARAN. ADV. SRI.K.SHRIHARI RAO FOR R5 SMT.N.SHOBHA FOR R5 SRI.P.N.ANOOP FOR R5 SRI.T.D.SALIM FOR R4 SRI.PAUL C THOMAS FOR R4 SRI.C.S.YESUDAS FOR R4 SRI.C.S.AJITH PRAKASH FOR R3 SRI.T.D.SALIM FOR R3 SRI.PAUL C THOMAS FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C) NO.8900 OF 2009 EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 21.1.2009 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE PROMOTER EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE MEMBERS OF 3RD AND 4TH RESPONDENT UNIONS. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. P.R.RAMAN & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.8900 OF 2009 ------------------------------- Dated this the 27th March, 2009 J U D G M E N T Raman, J. The petitioner, complaining that the construction work of the building undertaken by him has come to a stand-still because of the dispute between the unions, has approached this Court, seeking necessary police protection from respondents 1 and 2, to the life of the petitioner, the employees engaged by him and also to take necessary steps to carry out the construction work. 2. Respondents 3, 4 and 5 have filed a detailed counter affidavit. They are the unions who supply the number of workmen required by the petitioner. It is submitted that fifth respondent is a new union and they also demand work under the petitioner. The petitioner has no objection in engaging the maximum number of five workers from that union. The same is W.P.(C) No.8900/2009 2 recorded. The remaining workers are to be engaged as per the choice of the petitioner from other respondents-unions. 3. It is submitted that the above understanding will be strictly complied with and there will not be any obstruction caused by any of the respondents-Unions. However, if there is any obstruction or impediment caused to the work of the petitioner, respondents 1 and 2 are directed to remove such obstruction. The writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE. nj.