Muhamadali vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 6542 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

  WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 5TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                      WP(C).No.22947 OF 2020(P)


PETITIONERS:

      1        MUHAMADALI,
               AGED 40 YEARS
               S/O. MOIDHI, CHALIL HOUSE, MENNHANIAM,
               PERAMBRA, KOZHIKODE-673525.

      2        SHAMEER V.K.
               AGED 35 YEARS
               S/O. MOIDHI, THAIKANDI MEETHAL,
               PERAMBRA, KOZHIKODE-673525.

      3        SHAHID O.T.,
               AGED 36 YEARS
               S/O. KUNJALI, KIZHAKKE MARUTHORACHALIL HOUSE,
               KAKKAD P.O., PERAMBRA VIA, KOZHIKODE-673525.

      4        SALEEM C.K.
               AGED 38 YEARS
               S/O. IBRAHIM, CHAMAKKALAYIL HOUSE, ERAVATTUR P.O.,
               PERAMBRA VIA, KOZHIKODE-673525.

      5        ANSU N.,
               S/O AZEEZ, AGED 36 YEARS
               NEELOTH HOUSE, MENNHANIAM, PERAMBRA VIA,
               KOZHIKODE-673525.

      6        SHAMEER M.C.,
               AGED 35 YEARS
               S/O. IBRAHIM, MARUTHORACHALIL, KAKKAD P.O.,
               PERAMBRA VIA, KOZHIKODE-673525.

      7        ANSAR K.,
               AGED 33 YEARS
               S/O. KOYAKUTTY, KAPPUMMAL HOUSE, PAITHOTH,
               PERAMBRA, KOZHIKODE-673525.

      8        JOUSHAL K.
               AGED 32 YEARS
               S/O. MOIDHI, CHENOULI P.O., PERAMBRA VIA,
               KOZHIKODE-673525.
 WP(C).No.22947 OF 2020        2



      9        AYUB K.M.,
               AGED 40 YEARS
               S/O. KUNJHIMOIDHI, NELLIYULLA PARAMBIL HOUSE,
               ERAVATTUR P.O., PERAMBRA VIA, KOZHIKODE-673525.

               BY ADV. SRI.T.D.SUSMITH KUMAR

RESPONDENTS:

      1        STATE OF KERALA,
               REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME
               AFFAIRS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

      2        THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
               KOZHIKODE RURAL, VATAKARA P.O., KOZHIKODE-673101.

      3        THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
               VATAKARA, VATAKARA P.O., KOZHIKODE-673101.

      4        THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
               PERAMBRA, PERAMBRA P.O., KOZHIKODE-673525.

      5        M.K.C. KUTTIYALI,
               S/O. MOIDEEN, AGED 62 YEARS, PARVEEN VILLA,
               MENNHANIAM, PERAMBRA, KOZHIKODE-673525.

      6        MUJEEB K.K.,
               S/O. UTHOTTI, AGED 45 YEARS, KOOLIKANDI HOUSE,
               PERAMBRA, KOZHIKODE-673525.

      7        SHAMEER P.T.,
               S/O. MOIDHU, AGED 40 YEARS, PILATHOTTATHIL HOUSE,
               CHIRUTHAKUNNU ROAD, PERAMBRA, KOZHIKODE-673525.

      8        IBRAHIM P.C.
               S/O. MOIDHI, AGED 45 YEARS, PERUVAANI CHEEKKILODE
               HOUSE, BYPASS ROAD, PERAMBRA, KOZHIKODE-673525.

      9        YOOSUF M.K.,
               S/O. MOIDHI, AGED 46 YEARS, MULLAN KUNNUMMAL HOUSE,
               KAIPRAM ROAD, ERAVATTUR P.O., PERAMBRA,
               KOZHIKODE -673525.

      10       ADDL. R10.
               PERAMBRA GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
               PERAMBRA P.O., KOZHIKODE-673 525, REPRESENTED BY
               ITS SECRETARY, PERAMBRA GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
 WP(C).No.22947 OF 2020      3



             PERAMBRA P.O., KOZHIKODE-673525

             ADDITIONAL R10 IMPLEADED AS PER THE ORDER DATED
             11.12.2020 IN IA. 01/2020 IN WP(C) 22947/2020.

             R1-4 BY SMT SHEEJA CS SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
             R5-9 BY ADV. SRI.M.MUHAMMED SHAFI
             R5-9 BY ADV. SMT.T.RASINI
             R10 BY SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
24.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.22947 OF 2020             4




                              JUDGMENT

The petitioners state that they are fishmongers and eke their

livelihood at the Perambra Fish Market, Kozhikode. They have

approached this Court seeking a direction to the respondents 2 to 4 to

provide effective protection to the petitioners to enter into the Perambra

Fish Market and conduct their business in a peaceful manner.

2. It is contended by the petitioners that they are the members

of the Centre of Indian Trade Union (CITU). The party respondents, on

the other hand, are members of the Swathanthra Thozhilali Union. Due

to political differences, the respondents have taken a stand that they will

not permit the petitioners to enter the Perambra Fish Market. It is

contended that on 20.8.2020, the party respondents along with their

men went on a rampage and attacked the petitioners. This resulted in a

melee and both sides sustained injuries. Crime No.714 of 2020 was

registered against the party respondents inter alia under Sections 324,

326 and 308 of the IPC at the Perambra Police Station. At the instance

of one of the party respondents, Crime No.712 of 2020 of the Perambra

Police Station was registered against the petitioners inter alia under

Section 308 of the IPC. According to the petitioners, the party

respondents have no authority or right to interfere with the rights of the

petitioners to practise any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade

or business. They state that they have lodged separate complaints before

the Police seeking intervention. Their grievance is that no action was

taken despite numerous requests. According to the petitioners, they are

still not permitted to enter the market under the threat of violence and

that their families are starving. It is in the afore circumstances that they

have filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs:

"i) to call for entire Records pertaining to the Exhibit-P3 and

all actions taken by the 4th respondent, pursuant to the respondent thereon;

ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2nd to 4th respondents to provide adequate protection to the petitioners to enter to the Perambra Fish Market, for peaceful running of their respective business;

iii) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2nd to 4th respondents to provide adequate protection to the life and limb of the petitioners;

iv) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2nd to 4th respondents to take adequate measures to pacify the hostility of the 5th to 9th respondents towards petitioners to enhance peaceful working atmosphere."

3. The Perambra Grama Panchayath, the 10th respondent

herein, has filed an affidavit through its Secretary. It is stated therein

that the Perambra Grama Panchayath is maintaining a fish market at

Perambra Town wherein as many as 90 persons are engaged in various

activities of fish vending. It is stated that though the Panchayath has not

issued any identity card to any person, the persons engaged in the

business of fish vending or allied work have been asked to obtain

certificates issued by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India

(FSSAI). The 10th respondent has also stated that they have not

entrusted the monopoly of fish business in the market to any individual

or any section of people. Through an auction process, authorization has

been given for collecting fees from the fish vendors, who conduct fish

vending in the market. It is stated that every person having FSSAI

certificate and engaged in the lawful avocation in the market are entitled

to engage themselves in the fish trade.

4. The Station House Officer, Perambra Police Station has filed a

statement. In the said statement, it is stated that there have been

multiple incidences of violence in the market due to disputes between

two factions. It is stated that pursuant to violence, which took place on

20.08.2020, the market was closed for a month. To pacify the situation, a

meeting was conducted at Collectorate, Kozhikode, wherein the Police,

Panchayath authorities, party representatives and Union leaders took

part. When all sides agreed that they shall ensure that they would not

precipitate any incident which may result in breach of peace, a decision

was taken to open the market. It is stated that the fish market is

functioning peacefully at the moment. It is further stated that the

present stalemate may be disrupted if the petitioners are given access

into the market.

5. The party respondents have filed an affidavit controverting

the assertions made by the petitioners. It is contended that the

petitioners have never worked in the Perambra Market. It is contended

that the certificates purported to have been issued by the FSSAI have

been issued only recently. According to the party respondents, they have

been working in the market after obtaining all certificates and clearances

for the past several decades and it is pointed out that the market is

capable of accommodating only a specific number of fish vendors. If

new vendors such as the petitioners are admitted into the market, it

would affect the business which is now being conducted by the party

respondents.

6. The party respondents have filed an additional counter

affidavit to controvert the counter filed by the 10th respondent. It is

contended that the market is functioning in a temporary building and the

fish vendors are divided into two shifts for want of space. It is contended

that if every person having a FSSAI certificate is permitted to carry out

fish vending in the market, it would derail the functioning as the facilities

are limited.

7. I have anxiously considered the submissions advanced and

have perused the records.

8. It is evident from the affidavit filed by the Secretary of the

Perambra Grama Panchayat that neither the party respondents nor the

petitioners have any monopoly in conducting fish vending in the market

run by the Panchayat. A person who has secured a certificate from the

FSSAI can aspire to conduct fish vending business inside the market. It

appears that the Panchayat has auctioned the collection of fees from fish

vendors and the persons who do fish vending are bound to pay fees to

the Panchayat. The Panchayat has also taken a definite stand that

neither the party respondents nor any other person can obstruct the

petitioners from carrying out fish vending.

9. The contention of the party respondents appears to be that

the space in the market is limited and the new entrants who do not owe

allegiance to their Union cannot be permitted to work. I do not think that

the respondents are justified in taking such a stand particularly when the

Panchayat asserts that no such monopoly has been granted to any

individual or Union. The right to practice any profession or to carry on

any occupation, trade or business is a right guaranteed to every citizen of

India under Article 19(1) (g) of the Constitution. Of course, it appears

that the party respondents have a majority in the area. However, that

would not permit them to interdict the petitioners from conducting fish

vending in a lawful manner after securing the certificate as insisted by

the Panchayat. If any threats are made or any obstruction is caused, and

obstruction is caused to such functioning, the respondents 3 and 4 are

bound to interfere. The petitioners would also be bound to maintain

peace and ensure that they do not disrupt the functioning of the market

and the resources are shared.

Resultantly, this writ petition is disposed of directing the

respondents 2 to 4 to closely monitor the functioning of the Permabra

Fish Market and ensure that all individuals who satisfy the norms fixed by

the panchayat are provided access to the market to do fish vending

business. If there is a threat of violence, respondents No.2 shall

intervene and take appropriate action. If either the petitioners or the

respondents violate the law, and a complaint is received, appropriate

action shall be taken against the depredators. Both sides are cautioned

and the 2nd respondent is reminded that despite the above directions if

the parties resort to indiscriminate violence, appropriate action shall be

taken which may include complete stoppage of the functioning of the

market.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

JUDGE DSV

APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR PERTAINING TO CRIME NO.714/2020 OF PERAMBRA POLICE STATION, DOWNLOADED FROM THE OFFICIAL WEBSITE OF THE KERALA POLICE.

EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR PERTAINING TO CRIME NO.712/2020 OF PERAMBRA POLICE STATION, DOWNLOADED FROM THE OFFICIAL WEBSITE OF THE KERALA POLICE.

EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 01/10/2020 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONERS TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT PERTAINING TO THE EXHIBIT P3, DATED 01/10/2020 ISSUED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERAMBRA.

EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONS DATED 16/10/2020 PREFERRED BY THE 1ST PETITIONERS TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONS DATED 16/10/2020 PREFERRED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONS DATED 16/10/2020 PREFERRED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONS DATED 16/10/2020 PREFERRED BY THE 4TH PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONS DATED 16/10/2020 PREFERRED BY THE 5TH PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P10 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONS DATED 16/10/2020 PREFERRED BY THE 6TH PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P11 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONS DATED 16/10/2020 PREFERRED BY THE 7TH PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P12 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONS DATED 16/10/2020 PREFERRED BY THE 8TH PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P13 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONS DATED 16/10/2020 PREFERRED BY THE 9TH PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P14 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONS DATED 17/10/2020 PREFERRED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P15 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONS DATED 17/10/2020 PREFERRED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P16 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONS DATED 17/10/2020 PREFERRED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P17 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONS DATED 17/10/2020 PREFERRED BY THE 4TH PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P18 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONS DATED 17/10/2020 PREFERRED BY THE 5TH PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P19 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONS DATED 17/10/2020 PREFERRED BY THE 6TH PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P20 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONS DATED 17/10/2020 PREFERRED BY THE 7TH PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P21 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONS DATED 17/10/2020 PREFERRED BY THE 8TH PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P22 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONS DATED 17/10/2020 PREFERRED BY THE 9TH PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P23 THE PHOTOGRAPH PERTAINING TO THE FISH MARKET TAKEN BY A LOCAL PHOTOGRAPHER ON 20/08/2020.

EXHIBIT P24 THE PHOTOGRAPH PERTAINING TO THE FISH MARKET TAKEN BY A LOCAL PHOTOGRAPHER ON 20/08/2020.

EXHIBIT P25 THE TRUE COPY OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATED 03/11/2020 HAVING REGISTRATION NO.21320238000579 ISSUED BY THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY ALONG WITH PRODUCT ANNEXURE, VALIDITY ANNEXURE AND REGISTRATION ID CARD TO THE 1ST PETITIONER

EXHIBIT P26 THE TRUE COPY OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATED 15/07/2020 HAVING REGISTRATION NO.21320238000332 ISSUED BY THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY ALONG WITH PRODUCT ANNEXURE, VALIDITY ANNEXURE AND REGISTRATION ID CARD TO THE 2ND PETITIONER

EXHIBIT P27 THE TRUE COPY OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATED 21/07/2020 HAVING REGISTRATION NO.21320238000369 ISSUED BY THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY ALONG WITH PRODUCT ANNEXURE, VALIDITY ANNEXURE AND REGISTRATION ID CARD TO THE 3RD PETITIONER

EXHIBIT P28 THE TRUE COPY OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATED 28/07/2020 HAVING REGISTRATION NO.21320238000408 ISSUED BY THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY ALONG WITH PRODUCT ANNEXURE, VALIDITY ANNEXURE AND REGISTRATION ID CARD TO THE 4TH PETITIONER

EXHIBIT P29 THE TRUE COPY OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATED 28/07/2020 HAVING REGISTRATION NO.21320238000407 ISSUED BY THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY ALONG WITH PRODUCT ANNEXURE, VALIDITY ANNEXURE AND REGISTRATION ID CARD TO THE 5TH PETITIONER

EXHIBIT P30 THE TRUE COPY OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATED 01/12/2020 HAVING REGISTRATION NO.21320238000716 ISSUED BY THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY ALONG WITH PRODUCT ANNEXURE, VALIDITY ANNEXURE AND REGISTRATION ID CARD TO THE 6TH PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P31 THE TRUE COPY OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATED 21/07/2020 HAVING REGISTRATION NO.21320238000368 ISSUED BY THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY ALONG WITH PRODUCT ANNEXURE, VALIDITY ANNEXURE AND REGISTRATION ID CARD TO THE 7TH PETITIONER

EXHIBIT P32 THE TRUE COPY OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATED 27/07/2020 HAVING REGISTRATION NO.21320238000402 ISSUED BY THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY ALONG WITH PRODUCT ANNEXURE, VALIDITY ANNEXURE AND REGISTRATION ID CARD TO THE 8TH PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P33 THE TRUE COPY OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATED 16/07/2020 HAVING REGISTRATION NO.21320238000363 ISSUED BY THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY ALONG WITH PRODUCT ANNEXURE, VALIDITY ANNEXURE AND REGISTRATION ID CARD TO THE 9TH PETITIONER.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT R5(a) TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION BY THE COMMISSIONORATE OF FOOD SAFETY ISSUED TO R5

EXHIBIT R5(b) TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION BY THE COMMISSIONORATE OF FOOD SAFETY ISSUED TO R6

EXHIBIT R5(c) TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION BY THE COMMISSIONORATE OF FOOD SAFETY ISSUED TO R7

EXHIBIT R5(d) TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION BY THE COMMISSIONORATE OF

FOOD SAFETY ISSUED TO R8

EXHIBIT R5(e) TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION BY THE COMMISSIONORATE OF FOOD SAFETY ISSUED TO R9

EXHIBIT R5(f) TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARDS ISSUED TO THE 7TH RESPONDENT BY THE KERALA FISHERMEN'S WELFARE BOARD.

EXHIBIT R5(g) TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARDS ISSUED TO THE 8TH RESPONDENT BY THE KERALA FISHERMEN'S WELFARE BOARD.

EXHIBIT R5(h) TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARDS ISSUED TO THE 9TH RESPONDENT BY THE KERALA FISHERMEN'S WELFARE BOARD.

EXHIBIT R5(i) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN B.A.NO.5627 OF