Kerala High Court

Alkem Laboratories Limited vs State Of Kerala on 31 March, 2021

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

   WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 10TH CHAITHRA, 1943

                      W.P.(C) No.8267 OF 2021(G)


PETITIONER:

               ALKEM LABORATORIES LIMITED,
               REGISTERED OFFICE ALKEM HOUSE,
               SENAPATI BAPAT MARG, LOWER PAREL(WEST),
               MUMBAI - 400013, REPRESENTED BY ITS
               DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER - HR, MR.ATUL C. PARAB.

               BY ADVS.
               BENNY P THOMAS
               SRI.THOMAS J.ANAKKALLUNKAL
               SHRI.ABEL TOM BENNY
               SMT.MARIA PAUL

RESPONDENTS:

      1        STATE OF KERALA
               REPRESENTED BY HOME SECRETARY,
               SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.

      2        DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF
               KOZHIKODE CITY, PAVAMANI ROAD,
               TAZHEKKOD, KOZHIKODE - 673004.

      3        THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
               NADAKKAVU POLICE STATION, KANNUR ROAD,
               WEST NADAKKAVE, EAST NADAKKAVE,
               VELLAYIL, KOZHIKODE - 673011.

      4        THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
               CHEVAYUR POLICE STATION, TECH COMPUTER EDUCATION,
               WAYANAD ROAD, NEAR G, PAROPPADI,
               KOZHIKODE - 673012.

      5        THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
               MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION, MEDICAL COLLEGE
               ENTRANCE ROAD, VELLIPARAMBA, KOZHIKODE - 673008.

      6        THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
               KASABA POLICE STATION, THALOOK OFFICE ROAD,
               PUTHIYARA, KOZHIKODE - 673004.
 W.P.(C) No.8267 OF 2021(G)
                               -2-

       7      KERALA MEDICAL AND SALES REPRESENTATIVE
              ASSOCIATION.
              (KMSRA), BTR BHAWAN, CEMENTERY JUNCTION, CHITTOR
              ROAD, ERNAKULAM - 682018, REPRESENTED BY ITS
              GENERAL SECRETARY, MR. MOHAN C. NAIR.

              SRI JESTIN MATHEW - GOVERNMENT PLEADER ;
              SRI S.KRISHNAMOORTHY - STANDING COUNSEL

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 31.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.8267 OF 2021(G)
                                      -3-


                                JUDGMENT

The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of

the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus

commanding respondents 2 to 6 to afford adequate and effective

protection for smooth functioning of the business activities of the

petitioner Company and to ensure peaceful working atmosphere

for the Managers of the petitioner Company; and adequate

protection for the property/products of the petitioner Company

without any disturbance, hindrance, obstruction or threats from

the 7th respondent and its members or any other person/persons

on their behalf. The petitioner has also sought for a direction to

respondents 2 to 6 to act on the complaints submitted by the

petitioner Company and to take appropriate action against the 7 th

respondent and their members whenever the illegal and unlawful

activities committed by them are reported to respondents 2 to 6

and also to ensure that the petitioner carries on its business

activities without any disturbance or obstruction by the 7 th

respondent, its members or any person on their behalf. In the writ

petition, it is alleged that seeking withdrawal of the order of

transfer of Sri.K.V.Krishna Kumar and others and also withdrawal W.P.(C) No.8267 OF 2021(G)

of the order of termination of other medical representatives, the

7th respondent association and its members are obstructing the

Managers of the petitioner Company from performing their field

visits. On various occasions, when the Managers visited hospitals,

the members of the 7th respondent association appeared there in

large numbers and abused them and threatened them with dire

consequences. In such circumstances, the petitioner submitted

Ext.P2 complaint dated 01.03.2021 before the 3 rd respondent

Station House Officer, Ext.P4 complaint dated 03.03.2021 before

the 4th respondent Station House Officer, Ext.P6 complaint dated

05.03.2021 before the 5th respondent Station House Officer, Ext.P9

complaint dated 06.03.2021 before the 5 th respondent Station

House Officer and Ext.P11 complaint dated 09.03.2021 before the

6th respondent Station House Officer seeking police protection and

thereafter, moved this writ petition before this Court seeking the

aforesaid reliefs.

2. On 30.03.2020, when this writ petition came up for

admission along with W.P.(C) Nos.8433 and 8457 of 2021, the

learned Government Pleader took notice on admission for the

official respondents. Urgent notice on admission by special W.P.(C) No.8267 OF 2021(G)

messenger was ordered to the party respondent, returnable by

31.03.2021.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned

Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 6 and also the

learned counsel for the 7th respondent.

4. The Kerala Police Act, 2011 is enacted to consolidate

and amend the law relating to the establishment, regulation,

powers and duties of the Police Force in the State of Kerala and for

matters connected therewith and incidental thereto. Chapter II of

the Act deals with duties and functions of Police. Section 3 of the

Act deals with general duties of Police. As per Section 3, the Police,

as a service functioning category among the people as part of the

administrative system shall, subject to the Constitution of India

and the laws enacted thereunder, strive in accordance with the

law, to ensure that all persons enjoy the freedoms and rights

available under the law by ensuring peace and order, integrity of

the nation, security of the State and protection of human rights.

Section 4 of the Act deals with functions of Police. As per Section

4, the Police Officers shall, subject to the provisions of the Act,

perform the functions enumerated in clauses (a) to (s) of Section W.P.(C) No.8267 OF 2021(G)

4. As per clause (a), the Police Officers shall enforce the law

impartially; and as per clause (b), the Police Officers shall protect

the life, liberty, property, human rights and dignity of all persons in

accordance with the law.

5. Lord Denning in 'The Due Process of law' [First Indian

Reprint 1993, Page 102] has described the role of the Police thus;

"In safeguarding our freedoms, the police play vital role. Society for its defence needs a well-led, well-trained and well-disciplined force or police whom it can trust, and enough of them to be able to prevent crime before it happens, or if it does happen, to detect it and bring the accused to justice.

The police, of course, must act properly. They must obey the rules of right conduct. They must not extort confessions by threats or promises. They must not search a man's house without authority. They must not use more force than the occasion warrants."

6. In Manohar Lal Sharma v. Principal Secretary

[(2014) 2 SCC 532] the Apex Court held that, one of the

responsibilities of the police is protection of life, liberty and

property of citizens. The investigation of offences is one of the

important duties the police has to perform. The aim of

investigation is ultimately to search for truth and bring the W.P.(C) No.8267 OF 2021(G)

offender to the book. The Apex Court reiterated the said principle

in Ankush Maruti Shinde v. State of Maharashtra [(2019) 15

SCC 470].

7. In Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd. Vs. Gujarat Steel Tubes

Mazdoor Sabha [(1980) 2 SCC 593] the Apex Court held that,

the right to unionise, the right to strike as part of collective

bargaining and subject to the legality and humanity of the

situation, the right of the weaker group viz. labour, to pressure the

stronger party viz. capital, to negotiate and render justice, are

processes recognised by industrial jurisprudence and supported by

Social Justice. While society itself, in its basic needs of existence,

may not be held to ransom in the name of the right to bargain and

strikers must obey civilised norms in the battle and not be vulgar

or violent hoodlums industry, represented by intransigent

Managements, may well be made to reel into reason by the strike

weapon and cannot then sequeal or wail and complain of loss of

profits or other ill-effects but must negotiate or get a reference

made. The broad basis is that workers are weaker although they

are the producers and their struggle to better their lot has the

sanction of the rule of law. Unions and strikers are no more W.P.(C) No.8267 OF 2021(G)

conspiracies than professions and political parties, are, and being

far weaker, need succour. Part IV of the Constitution, read with

Article 19, sows the seed of this burgeoning jurisprudence. The

Gandhian quote at the beginning of the judgment [Para.5 @ Page

603 SCC] sets the tone of economic equity in industry. Of course,

adventurist, extremist, extraneously inspired and puerile strike,

absurdly insane persistence and violent or scorched earth policies

boomerang and are anathema for the law. Within these

parameters the right to strike is integral to collective bargaining.

8. The learned counsel for the 7 th respondent would point

out certain disputes in connection with termination of service of

two medical representatives and transfer of three others, who are

members of the 7th respondent association. The learned counsel

would submit that various other issues are also pending

conciliation before the concerned District Labour Officer. The

petitioner Management has not chosen to attend the conciliation

proceedings. The learned counsel would submit further that the

members of the 7th respondent association have absolutely no

intention to cause any threat or obstruction to the field visit of the

Managers of the petitioner Company and they have no intention to W.P.(C) No.8267 OF 2021(G)

take law into their own hands.

9. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that

the Management has already submitted written submission before

the concerned District Labour Officer, raising appropriate legal and

factual contentions and that, the Management shall co-operate

with the conciliation proceedings.

10. The learned Government Pleader would submit that, in

case there is any threat to law and order, in connection with any

protest/agitation made by the members of the 7 th respondent

association, respondents 3 to 6 Station House Officers shall render

necessary police protection.

Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and

also the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides,

this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions;

i) Respondents 3 to 6 Station House Officers shall take necessary steps to ensure that there is no threat to law and order, in connection with any protest/agitation made by the members of the 6th respondent association.

ii) In case there is any threat to the life of the Managers, employees, etc. of the petitioner Company or any obstruction whatsoever to the field visits and other activities undertaken by them, from the side of the members of the 7th respondent association, the petitioner shall move W.P.(C) No.8267 OF 2021(G)

respondents 3 to 6 Station House Officers, with a proper request for police protection.

iii) In case any such request for Police protection is made by the petitioner, respondents 3 to 6 shall take necessary action on that request, without any delay, taking note of the statutory provisions referred to hereinbefore and also the law laid down in the decisions referred to supra.

iv) The above directions are subject to the condition that the petitioner Management shall co-operate with the conciliation proceedings pending before the concerned District Labour Officer. Any contention raised by the petitioner Management as to maintainability of such proceedings shall be dealt with appropriately by the concerned District Labour Officer.

v) This judgment will not stand in the way of the members of the 7th respondent association staging any protest/agitation, in a democratic manner, without causing any obstruction whatsoever, to the discharge of official duties by the Managers and other employees of the petitioner Company.

The learned Government Pleader shall communicate the

outcome of this writ petition to the respondents 3 to 6 Station

House Officers today itself.

Sd/-

ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE bpr W.P.(C) No.8267 OF 2021(G)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.10.2015 IN W.P.C. NO. 32993 OF 2015.

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE POLICE COMPLAINT FILED WITH THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 01.03.2021.

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ACKNOWLEDGING EXHIBIT P2.

EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE POLICE COMPLAINT DATED 03.03.2021 FILED WITH THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ACKNOWLEDGING EXHIBIT P4.

EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE POLICE COMPLAINT DATED 05.03.2021 MAILED TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT.