Sunitha Beevi vs. The Superintendent Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR FRIDAY ,THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 8TH CHAITHRA, 1941 WP(C).No. 6417 of 2019 PETITIONER/S: SUNITHA BEEVI, PROPRIETRESS, ALAMPARA PLYWOOD VEENIER PEELING UNIT, PARASSALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.C.S.AJITH PRAKASH A.T..JOSE SRI.M.B.SOORI SRI.FRANKLIN ARACKAL SRI.PAUL C THOMAS SRI.T.K.DEVARAJAN RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004. 2 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NEYYATTINKARA, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 121. 3 THE CIRCLE INSEPCTOR OF POLICE, PARASALA,OFFICE OF THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARASALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 505. 4 SATHESH @ LIJO, CONVENER,CITU UNION, ALAMPARA, KOZHUKKOTTUKONAM, ALAMPARA, PARASUVAIKKAL P.O., -695 502. W.P.C.No.6417/2019 2 5 MANIKUTTAN @ VIJAYA PREMKUMAR, CONVENER, CITU UNION, ALAMPARA, KOZHUKKOTTUKONAM, ALAMPARA, PARASUVAIKKAL P.O.-695 502 6 REJI, CONVENER, CITU UNION, ALAMPARA, KOZHUKKOTTUKONAM, ALAMPARA, PARASUVAIKKAL P.O.-695 502. 7 PODIYAN, ALAMPRA,PARASUVAIKKAL.P.O. -695 502. *8 THE CHAIRMAN, DISTRICT COMMITTEE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 035. *(ADDL.8TH RESPONDENT IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 18.03.2019 IN I.A.NO.1/2019) BY ADVS. SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM, SC, KHWWB SMT.S.RAKHEE SRI.K.JANARDHANA SHENOY SRI.N.SATHEESH OTHER PRESENT: SR.GP SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P.C.No.6417/2019 3 J U D G M E N T P.R.Ramachandra Menon, J. The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers: “i. To issue a writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ or order or direction, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to afford sufficient and meaningful police protection to the petitioner, her establishment of Veneer Unit at Alampara and to her headload workers from party respondents herein and their men and associate or Union leaders, so as to enable the smooth functioning of the establishment. ii) To declare that the petitioner is entitled to engage her own permanent head load workers, who are issued with 26A card, to carry out the loading unloading

activity

in the establishment.

W.P.C.No.6417/2019 4 iii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ or order or direction, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to order sufficient police protection for the free ingress and egress of the vehicles coming into the petitioner's Veneer at Alampara, from the party respondents or any person acting under them.”

W.P.C.No.6417/2019 5 registration of the permanent workers in terms of Rule 26A and identity cards issued by the competent authority have been produced as Exts.P5, P6 and P7. It is without any regard to the Rule of Law that the private respondents are making forceful obstructions with regard to the loading and unloading activities in the petitioner's unit. We heard the learned senior Government Pleader as well. In so far as the place in question is not a scheme covered area, the petitioner is entitled to do the loading and unloading activities deploying the workers of her choice by virtue of the law declared by a Full Bench of this Court in Karunakara Kurup v. State of Kerala [2004 (1) KLT 215 (FB)] even otherwise, in so far as the petitioner is having the registered permanent workers/attached workers the private respondents do not have any right to cause forceful obstruction in connection with any loading unloading activities. In the said circumstance, we find it appropriate to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to afford adequate and effective protection to the loading and unloading activities being pursued by the petitioner on the strength of Exts.P5 to P7 cards. The private respondents are set at liberty to file counter affidavit.”

W.P.C.No.6417/2019 6 Heard the counsel on both sides. Considering the fact that the place in question is not a scheme covered area as asserted by the counsel appearing for the parties on both sides, this Court finds it appropriate to make the interim order absolute. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. (P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE) (N.ANIL KUMAR, JUDGE) DG

W.P.C.No.6417/2019 7 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 AOF THE TRADE LICENSE ISSUED BY PARASSALA GRAMA PANCHAYATH DATED 30.06.2018 EXHIBIT P2 AOF THE UDYOG AADHAAR CARD OF THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P3 AOF THE GST REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE WITH NO.32AIZBD4630L2Z1 EXHIBIT P4 AOF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER NO.HL(A) 493/2018 DATED 24.11.2018 EXHIBIT P5 AOF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED TO HEADLOAD WORKER MR.VIJAYAKUMAR DATED 24.11.2018 EXHIBIT P6 AOF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED TO HEADLOD WORKER MR.CHRISPIN DEVARAJ.G.DATED 24.11.2018 EXHIBIT P7 AOF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED TO THE HEADLOD WORKER MR.SHAJI KUMAR.G., DATED 24.11.2018 EXHIBIT P8 AOF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT RURAL S.P EXHIBIT P9 AOF THE RECEIPT ISSUED FORM THE OFFICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P10 AOF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE DY.S.P., NEYYATTINKARA DATED 27.02.2019 EXHIBIT P11 AOF THE PETITION FOR POLICE PROTECTION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE PARASALA POLICE STATION DATED 27.02.2018 EXHIBIT P12 AOF THE RECEIPT DATED 27.02.2019 ISSUED BY THE PARASALA POLICE STATION