M/S. Rds-Cvcc (Jv) vs Superintendent Of Police
2021 Latest Caselaw 15272 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                          PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
 THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JULY 2021 / 31ST ASHADHA, 1943
                   WP(C) NO. 910 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

         M/S. RDS-CVCC (JV),
         6TH FLOOR, ALPHA PLAZA, KP VALLON ROAD,
         KADAVANTHRA, KADAVANTHRA P.O., KOCHI-682 020 ,
         REPRESENTED BY AUTHORISED SIGNATORY
         SAJI.V.CHERIAN

         BY ADVS.
         DEEPU THANKAN
         SMT.UMMUL FIDA
         SMT.LAKSHMI SREEDHAR



RESPONDENTS:

    1     SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
          KOLLAM RURAL, KOTTARAKKARA, KOTTARAKKARA P.O.,
          KOLLAM-691 508

    2     DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
          PUNALUR,PUNALUR P.O., KOLLAM-691 305

    3     CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
          PATHANAPURAM, PATHANAPURAM P.O.,KOLLAM-689 695

    4     KERALA STATE TRANSPORT PROJECT,
          T.C.11/339,SREE BALA BUILDING, KESTON ROAD,
          KOWDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS PROJECT DIRECTOR

    5     SHIJU,
          AZHIYATH PUTHENVEETIL, NEDUMPARAMBU,
          PATHANAPURAM,PATHANAPURAM P.O., KOLLAM-689 695

    6     PODIMON ALIAS SHARAFUDEEN,
          PADINJATETHIL,PATHANAPURAM,PATHANAPURAM P.O.,
          KOLLAM-689 695
 WP(C) NO. 910 OF 2021
                                      -2-



      7          ANIL KUMAR,
                 PUTHUPARAMBIL, ELAPPUPARA, PATHARIKAL,
                 PATHANAPURAM,PATHANAPURAM P.O., KOLLAM-689 695

      8          JOBY VARGHESE,
                 PAZHAYADATHU HOUSE, PATHANAPURAM,PATHANAPURAM
                 P.O., KOLLAM-689 695

      9          AZAD
                 MUTTAMON, PATHANAPURAM, PATHANAPURAM P.O.,
                 KOLLAM-689 695

     10          BALAN, CONVENOR,
                 CITU UNION, PATHANAPURAM,PATHANAPURAM P.O.,
                 KOLLAM-689 695

     11          RAFEEQ,
                 CONVENOR, INTUC UNION,
                 PATHANAPURAM,PATHANAPURAM P.O., KOLLAM-689 695

  ADDL12         PATHANAPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT
                 PATHANAPURAM P.O.
                 KOLLAM- 689695 BY ITS SECRETARY


             BY ADVS.
             SRI.RAJAN VISHNURAJ
             SRI.V.HARISH

             SRI.N.B.SUNIL NATH, GP




          THIS    WRIT    PETITION    (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION         ON    22.07.2021,   THE   COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 910 OF 2021
                                  -3-



                  P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN,J.
             ===============================
                         W.P.(C) No.910 of 2021
             ===============================
              Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2021

                               JUDGMENT

Above writ petition is filed with following

reliefs:-

"i. issue a writ of mandamus or order or direction directing the first respondent to provide adequate protection to the petitioner, its staff, other workers, vehicles and construction materials in the property covered by Exhibit P3 at Pathanapuram from the illegal acts of the respondents 5 to 11;

ii. Issue writ of mandamus or order or direction directing the first respondent to consider Exhibit P4 & P5 complaints of the petitioner and to provide police proteciton to the petitioner, its staff, other workers, vehicles and construction materials in the property covered by Exhibit P3 at the Pathanapuram from the illegal acts of the respondents 5 to 11;

iii. Issue writ of mandamus or order or direction directing the first respondent to ensure that the respondents 5 to 11 and their men are not causing any obstruction to the loading and unloading of the fencing materials and fencing the perimeter of the property covered by Exhibit P3."

2. When this writ petition came up for

consideration before this Court on 21.01.2021, WP(C) NO. 910 OF 2021

this Court passed the following order:-

"Notice issued to the respondents 5, 6 and 9 returned with an endorsement 'unserved'.

Petitioner to take fresh steps to serve notice in the correct address of the said respondents.

Notice issued to respondents 10 and 11 returned with an endorsement 'refused'. Hence, service of notice on respondents 10 and 11 is declared as complete.

The learned counsel for the respondents 7 and 8 seeks time to file counter affidavit. The learned counsel would also point out that, on the cover of the interim order, the petitioner is undertaking development activities without a valid development permit.

Post on 09.02.2021.

It is made clear that the interim order granted in this writ petition to maintain the law and order will not make the petitioner to undertake any development activities, without a valid development permit.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is not undertaking any development activities. The said submission is recorded.

The learned Government Pleader seeks time to get instructions."

3. Thereafter this Court passed another

order on 22.02.2021, which is extracted

hereunder:-

"Heard Sri.Deepu Thankan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri. Harish Vasudevan, the learned counsel appearing for the party respondents and the learned Government Pleader.

2. When the matter was taken up, the WP(C) NO. 910 OF 2021

learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is yet to get a licence from the local authority and in that view of the matter, his only request is to interdict the respondents 5 to 11 and their men from obstructing the fencing of the property, which they have taken on lease on the strength of Ext.P3 lease deed.

3. The learned Government Pleader submits that the Panchayath is not in the array of parties and based on instructions from the police it is submitted that the people of the locality have been agitating against the attempt of the petitioner to put up a hot mix plant near to a school and in an area which is densely populated.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the party respondents submits that without obtaining statutory permits and licenses, the petitioner cannot start the functioning of the hot mix plant. However, it is fairly submitted that they cannot legitimately object to the construction of the fencing.

5. Petitioner shall implead the local authority and shall also produce a sketch of the property showing its mode of access to the nearby road and the location of the school.

Post on 25.2.2021.

The interim order dated 13.1.2021 as modified by order dated 21.1.2021 shall continue for a period of one week."

4. Subsequently, on 31.03.2021 this Court

passed the following order:-

"By order dated 01.03.2021, notice was issued to the proposed 12th respondent, the Pathanapuram Panchayat. The notice has not returned after service.

Smt.Ummul Fida, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that W.P.(C).No.5192 of 2021 has been filed by the petitioner seeking directions to the Pathanapuram Panchayat to consider the WP(C) NO. 910 OF 2021

application for development permit and the said writ petition is pending. The learned counsel requests that the petitioner be permitted to serve notice on the counsel appearing for the Panchayat in the said case.

The petitioner shall serve a copy of the writ petition to the learned counsel appearing for the Panchayat in W.P.(C).No.5192 of 2021 and file a memo.

Post on 07.04.2021. Interim order will stand extended till then. The petitioner may continue with the fencing activities as ordered by order dated 22.02.2021."

5. Today when the matter came up for

consideration, the learned counsel for the

contesting respondents submitted that the

Panchayath already dismissed the application

submitted by the petitioner for development

permit and building permit.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner

submitted that she has not received a copy of the

same. The learned counsel submitted that, the

interim order is only to the effect that the

petitioner can construct fencing in his property.

The counsel submitted that there is now threat

from the contesting respondents and others even

to enter the property by the petitioner. WP(C) NO. 910 OF 2021

7. The learned counsel for the contesting

respondents submitted that the above contentions

are absolutely incorrect. The only grievance of

the contesting respondent is that, the petitioner

cannot do development activities without

permission from the statutory authorities. The

learned counsel for the respondents submitted

that, there is no threat to the petitioner from

the contesting respondents as alleged. But the

learned counsel submitted that this Court may

make it clear that the petitioner cannot do any

activities in the property without getting

development and building permit from the local

authorities.

8. The learned Government Pleader also

submitted that, the petitioner cannot do any

development activities in the property without

getting permission from the local authorities and

other statutory authorities. The learned

Government Pleader also submitted that the WP(C) NO. 910 OF 2021

intention of the petitioner is to construct a hot

mixing unit, for which permission is necessary

from Pollution Control Board and other statutory

authorities.

9. In the light of the above contentions, I

think this Court cannot grant police protection

to the petitioner and his workers for

construction activities in the property. But the

interim order to the effect that the petitioner

can construct fencing to his property can

continue. But in the guise of that order, the

petitioner cannot do any development activities

in his property. Protection to the life of the

petitioner and his workers also can be granted.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed in the

following manner:-

1) If there is any threat to the life of

the petitioner and his workers, the petitioner

can approach the Station House Officer concerned

with a representation.

WP(C) NO. 910 OF 2021

2) If such a representation is received,

the Station House Officer will do the needful to

protect the life of the petitioner and his

workers.

3) The petitioner can construct fencing in

his property. If there is any objection from the

contesting respondents, the petitioner can

approach the police authority and police will do

the needful to see that the petitioner complete

the construction of fencing to his property. But

I make it clear that, under the guise of this

order the petitioner cannot do any other

development activities in the property without

getting licence/ permit from the statutory

authorities.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE hmh WP(C) NO. 910 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 910/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT DATED 28.09.2020

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 27.10.2020

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LEASE DEED DATED 23.12.2020

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 5.01.2021

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 7.01.2021

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT R7(A) A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED 06.01.2021 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, PATHANAPURAM GRAMAM PANCHAYATH

EXHIBIT R7(B) A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT DATED 07.01.2021 ISSUED BY THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

EXHIBIT R7(C) A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 06.01.2021 PREFERRED BY THE RESPONDENTS BEFORE THE HEALTH INSPECTOR, PATHANAPURAM

EXHIBIT R7(D) A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE MASS PETITION PREFERRE BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM