Kerala High Court
Bond Water Sports Pvt. Ltd vs State Of Kerala on 18 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 29TH MAGHA,1942
WP(C).No.3344 OF 2021(P)
PETITIONER:
BOND WATER SPORTS PVT. LTD.
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, JACKSON
PETER, AGED 38, S/O. JOHNSON PETER, HAVING
REGISTERED OFFICE AT SUSEELA TOWER, VRP
XIX/553-A, BEACH ROAD, KOVALAM, TRIVANDRUM,
KERALA-695 527.
BY ADVS.
SRI.SAIJO HASSAN
SRI.BENOJ C AUGUSTIN
SRI.RAFEEK. V.K.
SRI.U.M.HASSAN
SMT.P.PARVATHY
SMT.SURYA P SHAJI
SHRI.MANAS P HAMEED
SHRI.ELDHO.N.MONCY
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695
001.
2 DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
KERALA STATE POLICE HEADQUARTERS, VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 010.
3 COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, THYCAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.
4 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
KOVALAM POLICE STATION, KOVALAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 527.
WP(C)No.3344 of 2021
2
5 DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM, PARK VIEW,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.
6 PORT OFFICER
PORT OFFICE, NEENDAKARA, ASRAMAM, KOLLAM-691
082.
7 PURSER
PORT AND SHIPPING OFFICE, VIZHINJAM P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 121.
8 BOAT OWNERS OPERATING AT SEA ROCK BEACH,
REPRESENTED BY ANSARI, BOAT OWNER,
VALIYAVILAKAM, VALIYAPARAMBU, HARBOUR ROAD,
VIZHINJAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 521.
CORRECTED
ANSARI, MELETHAIVILAKAM, VIZHINJAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 521
THE ADDRESS OF 8TH RESPONDENT IS CORRECTED AS
PER THE ORDER DATED 16.02.2021 IN I.A.01/2021
IN WP(C) 3344/2021.
R6 BY ADV. SRI.K.P.SUDHEER
R8 BY ADV. SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW
R8 BY ADV. SRI.ARUN THOMAS
R8 BY ADV. SRI.JENNIS STEPHEN
R8 BY ADV. SRI.VIJAY V. PAUL
R8 BY ADV. SMT.KARTHIKA MARIA
R8 BY ADV. SMT.VEENA RAVEENDRAN
R8 BY ADV. SRI.ANIL SEBASTIAN PULICKEL
R8 BY ADV. SMT.DIVYA SARA GEORGE
R8 BY ADV. SMT.JAISY ELZA JOE
R8 BY ADV. SHRI.ABI BENNY AREECKAL
R8 BY ADV. SMT.LEAH RACHEL NINAN
R8 BY ADV. SMT.NANDA SANAL
SRI SUNIL NATH N.B- GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
18.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C)No.3344 of 2021
3
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who is the Managing Director of Bond Water
Sports Pvt. Ltd., has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus
commanding respondents 2 to 4 to take appropriate action
against the 8th respondent by registering FIR upon Ext.P5
complaint filed by the petitioner. The petitioner has also sought
for a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 2 to 4 to grant
adequate police protection to the life of the petitioner [sic the
Managing Director of the petitioner company] and its employees
and to take appropriate penal action against the 8 th respondent
and his men; and a writ of mandamus commanding respondents
2 to 4 to grant adequate police protection for smooth operation
of water sports activities at Sea Rock Beach, Kovalam,
Thiruvananthapuram District.
2. On 09.02.2021, when this writ petition was moved as
'today motion', the learned Government Pleader took notice on
admission for respondents 1 to 5. Urgent notice on admission by
special messenger was ordered to respondents 6 to 8, returnable
WP(C)No.3344 of 2021
by 12.02.2021. The learned Government Pleader was directed to
get instructions from the 4th respondent Station House Officer.
3. On 12.02.2021, when this writ petition came up for
consideration, this Court passed the following order;
"On 09.02.2021, this writ petition was moved as 'today
motion', since the learned counsel for the petitioner
mentioned urgency of the matter. This Court issued notice
on admission to respondents 1 to 5 and urgent notice on
admission by special messenger was ordered to
respondents 6 to 8 returnable by this date.
Today, when this writ petition is taken up for consideration,
it is noticed that description of the 8 th respondent is
incorrectly shown in the cause title, which reads thus:
Boat Owners Operating at Sea Rock Beach,
Represented by Ansari, Boat Owner,
Valiyaparambu, Harbour Road,
Vizhinjam P.O., Thiruvananthapuram - 695521
The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks time to file an
application to amend the cause title in order to show the
correct description of the 8th respondent.
Learned counsel for the petitioner to furnish a copy of the
writ petition to the learned Government Pleader, today
itself. List on 16.02.2021, as requested by the learned
counsel for the petitioner.
Registry to call for an explanation from the Filing Scrutiny
WP(C)No.3344 of 2021
Officer, who has numbered this writ petition."
4. The petitioner has filed I.A.No.1 of 2021, seeking an
order to correct the description of the 8 th respondent as stated in
that interlocutory application, which was allowed by the order
dated 16.02.2021. The learned Standing Counsel for Kerala
Maritime Board entered appearance for respondents 6 and 7 and
the 8th respondent has also entered appearance through the
counsel.
5. On 17.01.2021, during the course of arguments, it
was noticed that the writ petition does not contain proper
pleadings, in order to seek the reliefs sought for, based on the
allegations levelled against the 8th respondent. At the request of
the learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition was
ordered to be listed today.
6. Today, when the matter was taken up for
consideration as item No.19, the learned counsel for the 8 th
respondent submitted that, after the filing of the writ petition, the
4th respondent Station House Officer prevented the 8 th respondent
and other boat operators, from operating their boats from Sea
WP(C)No.3344 of 2021
Rock Beach, Kovalam for which they have valid licence. The
learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner
was also prevented from conducting water sports activities at Sea
Rock Beach, Kovalam. Therefore, the learned Government
Pleader was directed to get instructions from the 4 th respondent
Station House Officer and the matter was taken up again at
12.45 p.m.
7. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions from
the 4th respondent Station House Officer, would submit that,
since the operational area of the petitioner, the 8th respondent
and other boat operators, at Sea Rock Beach, Kovalam, was not
earmarked, in order to avoid law and order issue, the then
Station House Officer instructed them not to have any water
sports activities or operation of boats, for a period of two days.
8. The learned counsel for the 8th respondent would point
out that Ext.P5 complaint made before the 4 th respondent Station
House Officer does not contain any allegations against the 8 th
respondent, so as to enable the petitioner to seek any relief for
police protection against the said respondent.
WP(C)No.3344 of 2021
9. The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks
permission to withdraw this writ petition, without prejudice to the
right of the petitioner to file a fresh writ petition with appropriate
pleadings and proper parties in the party array.
10. In such circumstances, this writ petition is dismissed
as withdrawn, without prejudice to the aforesaid right of the
petitioner.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything
on the merits of the rival contentions raised on behalf of the
petitioner and the 8th respondent.
Sd/-
ANIL K. NARENDRAN
JUDGE
yd
