Kerala High Court
Mohammed Irfan V.P vs The Station House Officer on 11 April, 2024
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 13222 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
MOHAMMED IRFAN V.P.
AGED 26 YEARS
S/O V.P. ALAVI, MANAGING PARTNER, V.P.M. AGENCIES,
X/449, A3, THOTTUNGAL, UNIVERSITY ROAD,
RAMANATTUKARA, KOZHIKODE - 673633, RESIDING AT V.P.
HOUSE, THIRUVANGATTU THADATHIL, CHELEMBRA,
TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM,, PIN - 673634
BY ADV R.RAMADAS
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
FEROKE POLICE STATION, FEROKE, KOZHIKODE, PIN -
673631
2 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, KOZHIKODE, PIN
- 673001
3 HEADLOAD WORKERS UNION
THOTTUNGAL AREA, NEAR V.P. TRADELINKS, THOTTUNGAL,
RAMANATTUKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY
ITS SECRETARY., PIN - 673633
BY ADV K.S.ARUN KUMAR
SRI.P.M.SHAMEER, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 13222 OF 2024
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is stated to be the Managing Partner of a business entity and that he is conducting grocery business, as also the sale of food items and packing materials, in an area which is not within a "Scheme" covered by any notification under the Kerala Headload Workers Act ('the Act' for short). He says that he has two registered workers, both holding authorisation under Rule 26 A, issued by the Assistant Labour Officer, Feroke which is evident from Ext.P1 series; but that he and such men are being obstructed regularly by the 3 rd respondent - Union and their men, for untenable reasons, making usurious demands. He says that, he, therefore, preferred Ext.P2 complaint before the 1 st respondent; but that since it has evoked no response, he has been constrained to approach this Court through this Writ Petition.
2. Sri.R.Ramdas - learned counsel for the petitioner, pertinently conceded that there has been a mistake in filing this Writ Petition because, Ext.P2 is not the document that has been referred to in its Memorandum. He explained that, WP(C) NO. 13222 OF 2024 3 Ext.P2 happens to be that of another person; but argued that, nevertheless, his client had approached the Police and had requested for protection. He, thus reiteratedly prayed that the reliefs sought for in this Writ Petition be granted, particularly because the area in question is not covered by a Scheme under the 'Act'.
3. Crucially, Sri.K.S.Arun Kumar - learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd respondent - Board, unequivocally conceded that the place where the petitioner 's business is being carried on, is not covered by a Scheme under the 'Act'. He, however, submitted that when the petitioner has no registered workers, he has to rely upon the members of the statutory 'Pool', who are all attached to his client's Union. He, thus prayed that this Writ Petition be dismissed.
4. Sri.P.M.Shameer - learned Government Pleader, interestingly, did not support the submissions of the 3rd respondent, saying that since the petitioner has two registered workers, which is evident from Ext.P1 series and since the area is not covered by a Scheme under the 'Act', the Police are giving them necessary protection from any threat and intimidation. He reiterated that the petitioner is, WP(C) NO. 13222 OF 2024 4 therefore, now facing no impediment in the loading and unloading activities in his business and that the Police will ensure it on a continuous basis.
5. I must say that there is great force in the afore submissions of the learned Government Pleader because, when it is conceded by the 3 rd respondent that the petitioner is carrying on business in an area which is not covered by a Scheme under the 'Act', they obtain no right to claim employment, or to cause any obstruction to the activities of the petitioner, or its registered headload workers. The factum of the petitioner having two registered headload workers is indubitable - as is admitted - from Ext.P1 series; and in such circumstances, I am certain that the petitioner is entitled to relief.
In the afore circumstances, I record the submissions of the learned Government Pleader and dispose of this Writ Petition; consequently, directing the 1st respondent to ensure that law and order is always maintained and that the petitioner and his registered workers - covered by Ext.P1 series - are afforded necessary and effective protection from the 3rd respondent union and its member/men, while carrying WP(C) NO. 13222 OF 2024 5 on their work; and that none of them is allowed to take law units their hands, or to commit breach of peace in future.
Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE lsn WP(C) NO. 13222 OF 2024 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13222/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED TO ABOOBACKER, PERMANENT WORKER OF THE PETITIONER Exhibit P1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD OF THE PERMANENT WORKER OF THE PETITIONER ASHRAF V.P. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26.03.2024 FILED BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 BY THE PETITIONER RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY P.A TO JUDGE LSN