Govindan vs State Of Kerala

Kerala High Court

Govindan vs State Of Kerala on 21 May, 2024

Author: Devan Ramachandran

Bench: Devan Ramachandran

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
    TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MAY 2024 / 31ST VAISAKHA, 1946
                       WP(C) NO. 17535 OF 2024
PETITIONER:

          GOVINDAN
          AGED 65 YEARS
          S/O.MAYANKUTTY, KUNNATH HOUSE, MALAYAKODE,
          KODUVAYUR P.O, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678501
          BY ADV NIREESH MATHEW


RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
          HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
    2     THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
          CHITTUR, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678101
    3     THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
          KOLLENGODE POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT,
          PIN - 678506
    4     THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
          KOLLENGODE POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT,
          PIN - 678506
    5     THE CHIEF WELFARE FUND INSPECTOR
          KERALA TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, ULLOOR
          GARDEN, PAROTTUKONAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
          PIN - 695044
    6     THE WELFARE FUND INSPECTOR
          KERALA TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, NURANI P.O,
          PALAKKAD, PIN - 678001
    7     THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER
          CIVIL STATION COMPLEX, KENATHUPARAMBU, KUNATHURMEDU,
          PALAKKAD, PIN - 678001
    8     KUNJU
          AGED 59 YEARS
          S/O.KARUPPAN, SNEHA HOUSE, PALAKULAMBU,
          VANDITHAVALAM P.O, CHITTUR TALUK,
          PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678534
    9     PARTHAN
          S/O.SHANMUGHAN, PULINKAVU, VANDITHAVALAM P.O,
          CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678534
 WP(C) NO. 17535 OF 2024          2

    10    DESIYA KALLU CHETHU VYAVASAYA THOZHILALI FEDERATION
          (INTUC)
          CONGRESS OFFICE, NENMARA, CHITTOOR, PALAKKAD,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY,
          SRI.R.VELAYUDHAN, PIN - 678508
          SRI.RENIL ANTO KANDAMKULATHY - SC
          SMT.REKHA C. NAIR - SR. GP
     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
21.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 17535 OF 2024              3

                             JUDGMENT

The petitioner is stated to be the licencee of certain toddy shops within the Kollengode Excise Range - one of which is toddy shop No.19. He says that he had disengaged one of his employees, namely, the 8 th respondent, who turned 59 years in age on account of ill health and because he has attained the age of superannuation; but that the said person is demanding that he should engage the 9th respondent, who is his brother's son, as a substitute. He alleges that the afore unfair demand of the 8th respondent has now been taken upon themselves by the Trade Unions and that they are impelling consistent threat and intimidation to him, thus constraining him to have approached the 3rd respondent - Station House Officer through Ext.P2 complaint seeking protection. He alleges that, however, no action has been taken on Ext.P2 until now, thus leaving him no other option but to approach this Court seeking necessary orders.

2. Sri.Renil Anto Kandamkulathy - learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.5 and 6, submitted that, as is evident from the afore narrative of the facts, the disputes between the parties are in the realm of labour jurisprudence and will have to be resolved through the process of law. He added that it is for the Labour Department to now WP(C) NO. 17535 OF 2024 4 intervene and take necessary action.

3. Smt.Rekha C.Nair - learned Senior Government Pleader, also submitted that the disputes impelled by the petitioner are not ones that can be resolved by the Police; but that they are ensuring that it does not degenerate into a situation where law and order is threatened. She concluded saying that the Police Authorities will abide by any directions to be issued by this Court.

4. I notice from the file that even though the party respondents have been validly served through a special messenger, they have chosen neither to be present in person, or to be represented through counsel; inferentially guiding me to the impression that they have nothing to offer in opposition to the allegations impelled by the petitioner.

5. As matters now stand, it is virtually conceded that there are disputes between the petitioner and the 8th respondent - who is stated to have been his earlier employee; but these are not matters that can be evaluated or resolved by this Court, while acting under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. As rightly argued by Sri.Renil Anto Kandamkulathy, the competent Authorities under the Labour Department may be enjoined to look into these aspects, as and when they are projected before them.

6. As far as the Police are concerned, it is their duty to ensure that law and order is maintained and that none of the parties are allowed to take law into their own hands. They are also obligated to make sure that the internecine disputes between the parties do not degenerate into a situation where there would be infraction of peace.

In the afore circumstances, I allow this writ petition, directing the 3rd respondent to ensure that the lives of the petitioner, as also the party respondents, are adequately protected from each other and that none of them are allowed to take any action which is in violation of law. The said Officer will make sure that law and order is maintained continually in the vicinity and these directions will be overseen by the 2nd respondent - Deputy Superintendent of Police, without fail.

As far as the party respondents are concerned, all their contentions are left open, as also their liberties and remedies, including before the competent Labour Authorities, if available in law.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE MC/21.5 WP(C) NO. 17535 OF 2024 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17535/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05.01.2024 IN WP(C)NOS.25485/2022 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 03.05.2024 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT WITH COPIES TO RESPONDENTS 2 AND 4 Exhibit P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER 18.10.2023 IN WP(C) NO.22142 OF 2023