Kerala High Court
James.P.T vs State Of Kerala 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. 14146 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
JAMES.P.T
AGED 67 YEARS
S/O.THOMMY, RESIDING AT PAPPALY,
THAIKKATTUKARA.P.O., ALWAYE, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 683106
BY ADVS.
S.SREEKUMAR (KOLLAM)
K.VIJAYAN
NAMITHA RAJESH
MALVIKA S KUMAR
K.C.SANTHOSH
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
ALWAYE EAST POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683101
3 SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
ERNAKULAM RURAL, ALWAYE, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683101
4 ABDUL OFFAR
AGED 50 YEARS
FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, RESIDING AT LAILA MANZIL,
UDHYOGAMANDAL.P.O., ELOOR, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683501
BY ADVS.
B.S.SURESH KUMAR
GEORGE SEBASTIAN(K/2800/1999)
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. 14146 OF 2024
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner says that he is running a business of retail sale of vegetables and such other articles, under the name 'PTJ Vegetables', in a private property which is next to the Alwaye Market, for the last 20 years. He says that the 4 th respondent has now started to obstruct and to intimidate him and his workers on the assertion that he has been granted licence to collect fees from him; but that this is untenable because, he is not liable to pay any such to any person. The petitioner says that when the threats from the 4 th respondent become unbearable, he preferred Ext.P4 petition, seeking protection before the 2nd respondent, but which has remained unheeded until now; and therefore, that he has been constrained to approach this Court through this Writ Petition.
2. In response, Sri.B.S.Suresh Kumar - learned counsel for the 4th respondent, submitted that the afore assertions of the petitioner are untrue and that his business is being run within the Municipal Market - the collection of fees with respect to shops therein, having been granted to his client. He submitted that attempt of the petitioner is only to WP(C) NO. 14146 OF 2024 3 avoid the payment of legitimate fees and hence, prayed that this Writ Petition be dismissed. He concluded saying that his client has not and will not cause any threat or intimidation to the petitioner, or cause any obstruction to his business; but sought liberty for him to invoke legal remedies against him - both for the recovery of liable fees as also for his eviction, if it becomes so warranted.
3. Sri.P.M.Shameer - learned Government Pleader submitted that the Police have already looked into the matter and have found no threat or intimidation being faced by the petitioner at the hands of the 4th respondent, as of now. He submitted that the Police cannot, and will not, enter into the disputes between the parties, as to whether the petitioner is liable to pay fees to the 4th respondent and that these are matters they should resolve through other processes of law.
4. I have no doubt that the afore stand of the Police is the most apposite in the given circumstances because, they are not authorized to enter into the disputes between the parties as mentioned above. Their only obligation is to ensure that the law and order is maintained and that internecine disputes do not degenerate into a scenario of breach of peace, WP(C) NO. 14146 OF 2024 4 causing nuisance to the locality itself.
In the afore circumstances, I allow this Writ Petition, directing the 2nd respondent to ensure that law and order is maintained in the area in question and that no threat, intimidation or obstruction is caused, either to the petitioner or his employees, or to the functioning of the shop; however, with liberty being reserved to both sides to invoke and pursue any remedy that may be legally available to them before the alternative forum/Court; for which, all rival contentions are left open.
The 3rd respondent - Superintendent of Police, will oversee the afore directions and ensure that there is no breach of them by any person and this shall be done on a continuous basis.
Sd/-DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE lsn WP(C) NO. 14146 OF 2024 5 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14146/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit -P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT FOR THE YEAR 2017 Exhibit -P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROFESSION TAX RECEIPTS ISSUED BY THE ALWAYE MUNICIPALITY FOR THE YEAR 2023-24 Exhibit -P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE ALWAYE MUNICIPALITY DATED 25.03.2024 AUTHORIZING THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO COLLECT FEES FROM THE VEGETABLE VENDORS Exhibit-P 4 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 02.04.2024 Exhibit -P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 02.04.2024 RESPONDENT EXHIBITS Exhibit R4(a) A true copy of the interim order dated 11.09.2023 in WP(C)29633/2023 Exhibit R4(b) A true copy of the counter affidavit dated 14.11.2023 filed by the Aluva Municipality in WP(C) 29633/2023 Exhibit R4(c) A true copy of the judgment dated 10.07.2023 in WP(C) 21955/2023 Exhibit R4(d) A true copy of the Counter affidavit filed by the Aluva Municipality in RP 1111/2023 in WP(C) 21955/2023 dated 13/12/2023 RUE COPY P.A TO JUDGE LSN