Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE THURSDAY, THE23D DAY OF JULY20151ST SRAVANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 16166 of 2015 (U) ---------------------------- PETITIONERS : -----------------
1. PRAVEEN KUMAR AGED49YEARS VETTAKKAL HOUSE, VARAPUZHA ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PIN68351
2. SHIBU P A., PAZHAYAKAT HOUSE, EDAVANAKAD P O ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PIN68250
3. SAJU T B., THUDATHIL HOUSE, MULAVUKAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT4 RONISH PERCIRA THOPPIL HOUSE, ELAMAKKARA P O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN68202
5. MANUEL PEREIRA THOPPIL HOUSE, ELAMAKKARA P O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PIN68202
6. K S AJAYAKUMAR KAITHAMANA HOUSE, BOLGATTY, MULAVUKAD ERNAKULAM DISTRICT7 GIRIGH C N CHEKKENATTU HOUSE, PONNARIMANGALAM MULAVUKAD ERNAKULAM DISTRICT8 SAJITH K D KODARNIKATHIL HOUSE, MKULAVUKAD , ERNAKULAM DISTRICT9 SABU JOSEPH THEKKINEDATH HOUSE, KOONAMMAVU P O, PIN68351
10. ANTONY MENDEX KALLANGARA HOUSE, VADUTHALA P O, KOCHI23ERNAKULAM DISTRICT WP(C).No. 16166 of 2015 (U) ---------------------------------
11. VIJIMON T V THUDIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PONNARIMANGALAM, MULAVUKAD ERNAKULAM DISTRICT12 SUDHEER T S THUDIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PONNARIMANGALAM, MULAVUKAD ERNAKULAM DISTRICT13 SHAJI ANANDHASERY HOUSE, PALLURUTHY P O, KOCHI ERNAKULAM DISTRICT14 SHALBY KEERAMPILLY HOUSE, PACHALAM T SQUARELINE SHANMUGAPURAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT15 GIGI PAUL THALIYATH THALIYATH HOUSE, MUPPATHADOM P O, ALUVA ERNAKULAM DISTRICT16 ANTONY MELVIN LUIZ CHERUPURETHIL HOUSE, THEVARA, PERUMANOOR ERNAKUKLAM DISTRICT17 BIJOY A B ALUNGAL HOUSE, THAIKKATTUKARA, ALUVA ERNAKULAM DISTRICT18 RATHIESH V P VELUTHERIL HOUSE, KOTHAD P O'ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PIN68202
19. SUNIL KUMAR P S PALLATH HOUSE, PIZHALA P O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT20 RAJESH K K KODERNIKATHIL HOUSE, BOLGHATTY, MULAVUKAD ERNAKULAM DISTRICT21 SHIBU XAVIER, KUTTIKKAL HOUSE, PONNURUNNI, VYTTILA ERNAKULAM DISTRICT22 JOSHY O B., KEERAMPILLY HOUSE, PACHALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT23 JYOTHIS, PARASSERY HOUSE, AMBELIPADAM ROAD, VYTTILA ERNAKULAM DISTRICT24 JAYAN M J MAKKOLIPARAMBIL HOUSE, KOLLASSERY ROAD, PALLURUTHY ERNAKULAM DISTRICT25 SURESH P K POTTANTTEPARAMBIL, VALLUVALLY P O, KOONAMMAVU ERNAKULAM DISTRICT26 MARINE DRIVE TOURIST BOAT ASSOCIATION RAINBOW JETTY, MARINE DRIVE , ERNAKULAM31REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SAJU T B BY ADVS.SRI.JOMY GEORGE SRI.SEBASTIAN THOMAS SRI.DEEPAK MOHAN RESPONDENTS : -------------------
1. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM- 682031
2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE CENTRAL POLICE STATION, KOCHIN68201
3. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE REVENUE TOWER, KOCHI68201
4. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT MOTOR BOAT THOZHILALI UNION (MBTU-CITU)66/1245., PAPPANCHETTAN SMARAKAK HALL KALABHAVAN ROAD, ERNAKULAM NORTH, KOCHI68201 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT P S SHANMUGHA DAS5 V V BABY SECRETARY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT MOTOR BOAT THOZHILALI UNION (MBTU-CITU)66/1245 PAPPANCHETTAN SMARAKAK HALL, KALABHAVAN ROAD ERNAKULAM NORTH, KOCHI68201
6. K M JANARDHANAN TREASURY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT MOTOR BOAT THOZHILALI UNION (MBTU-CITU)66/1245 PAPPANCHETTAN SMARAKAK HALL, KALABHAVAN ROAD ERNAKULAM NORTH, KOCHI68201
7. BHASI T S S/O.SEKARAN, THUNDIYIL HOUSE, PUTHUVYPE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN68250
8. GOPI K S/O.T A KRISHNAN, THEKKEOLIYATHU HOUSE, KAITHARAM NORTH PARAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN68351
9. NADESAN S/O.KOCHAL, NIKATHIL HOUSE, PALIYAM THURUTH PIZHALA P O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT68202 WP(C).No. 16166 of 2015 (U) ---------------------------------
10. KUNJAPPAN ARAKKAL HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT11 JEEMON @ YESUDAS J ARAKKAL HOUSE, PUTHUVAL THEKKU, KAKKGHAM P O ALAPPUZHA12 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001 R1 TO R3 & R12 BY ADV. SRI.K.A.JALEEL, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.C.R. SYAMKUMAR R4 TO R11 BY ADV. SRI.S.KANNAN SMT.K.S.SANGEETHA SMT.S.SIMY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON2307-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 16166 of 2015 (U) -------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS : ------------------------------ P1:-TRUE COPY OF THE FIR DTD225/2015 ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION IN CRIME NOS9222015 U/S.323,506(1), 294(B),427 & 34 IPC P2:-TRUE COPY OF THE FIR DTD265/2015 ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION IN CRIME NO9492015 U/S.143.,147,341,323,294(B) R/W149IPC P3:-TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD265/2015 ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION FILED BY THE26H PETITIONER BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM P4:-TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD275/2015 FILED BY THE WORKERS WHO ARE NOT ON STRIKE TO THE IST RESPONDENT P5:-TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION DTD265/2015 FILED BY THE25H PETITIONER BEFORE2D PETITIONER RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : ------------------------------- NIL /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE ASHOK BHUSHAN, C.J.
& A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 16166 OF2015- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of July, 2015 JUDGMENT
Shaffique, J.
Petitioners have approached this Court seeking police protection inter alia contending that respondents 4 to 11 are obstructing the operation of the vessels being operated by the petitioners as 'Tourist Boat Service'. It is contended that respondents 4 to 11 and their supporters were threatening the petitioners and creating obstruction to the peaceful life of the petitioners and their employees in regard to the operation of the tourist boats.
2. According to the petitioners, on 05.05.2015 the workers in the boats declared a strike demanding huge hike in their salary. Petitioners agreed to their demand and most of the workers withdrew from the strike. But some members of the CITU union continued their strike demanding wages even if there is no work. Though petitioners tried for an amicable settlement, respondents did not adhere to it and petitioners were attacked by respondents 5 to 11 and some other persons. WP(C) No.16166 of 2015 -:2:- Pursuant to which crimes have been registered as Crime No.922/2015 and also Crime No.949/2015 which are pending investigation. In the mean time, the petitioners submitted complaints to the police seeking adequate police protection and since no action was taken by police in this regard, they have approached this Court.
3. Counter affidavit has been filed by respondents 4 to 11 inter alia stating that they were only holding lawful strike. According to them, the intention of the petitioners was to prevent the labour issue being raised by the respondents. An additional affidavit has been filed inter alia stating that at the instance of police a settlement has been arrived at between the parties wherein the respondents and their members agreed to work at the enhanced rate of Rs.575/-. Some of the operators have agreed to the aforesaid suggestion and certain workers are already working. As far as the others are concerned, their claim is pending before the District Labour Officer and so far, no settlement had been arrived at, though discussions are proceeding. WP(C) No.16166 of 2015 -:3:- 4. Learned counsel for the respondents also submits that the petitioners are engaging persons who does not have any licence in operating the motor boats, on the basis of the interim directions issued by this Court to maintain the law and order. It is submitted by learned counsel that as per the rules and regulations in force, only licensed persons are entitled to operate the boats which is being violated by the petitioners.
5. Learned Government Pleader on instructions would submit that on the basis of the interim direction issued by this Court appropriate police protection had been given in order to maintain law and order. As matters stand now there is no law and order situation and the boats are being operated.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners would however submit that they are operating the boat service based on the interim direction issued by this Court and they have engaged only licensed persons for operating the boats.
7. As far as the claim of the contesting respondents with regard to the enhancement of wages and their respective rights are concerned, the matter apparently has to be decided WP(C) No.16166 of 2015 -:4:- by the District Labour Officer and parties have to abide by any such decision taken by the said authority. With regard to the allegations of the private respondents, regarding the validity or right of the persons now operating the tourist boats are concerned, it is for the competent authority to verify as to whether they are proper licence holders and are capable of operating the said boat service. It is always open for the private respondents to bring the matter to the notice of concerned authorities, who shall look into the matter and do the needful.
8. As far as the rights of the petitioners to operate the services are concerned, it cannot be obstructed by the private respondents or their men under the guise of labour dispute. If the petitioners do not operate the boat service, it may affect their livelihood as well. In the said circumstances, there will be a direction to the respondent Police to maintain law and order in the matter regarding the boat service being conducted by the petitioners which of course will be subject to the further directions that may WP(C) No.16166 of 2015 -:5:- be issued by the District Labour Officer regarding the wages as claimed by the respondents 5 to 11. Ashok Bhushan, Chief Justice. A.M. Shaffique, Judge. ttb/24/07