Paulachan T.A vs The Superintendent Of Police ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 18692 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
     THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 18TH BHADRA, 1943
                          WP(C) NO. 5752 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

              PAULACHAN T.A., AGED 56 YEARS, S/O. AUGUSTHY T.P,
              THIRUTHANATHY, ANGAMALY SOUTH P.O, ERNAKULAM

              BY ADVS.
              G.BIJU
              SRI.V.A.VINOD


RESPONDENTS:

    1         THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL), ERNAKULAM,
              OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL)
              POWER HOUSE JUNCTION, SUB JAIL ROAD, PERIYAR NAGAR,
              ALUVA 683101

    2         THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ANGAMALY POLICE
              STATION, ANGAMALY,, ERNAKULAM 683572

    3         ANGAMALY-KALADY AREA LORRY DRIVERS AND CLEANERS
              UNION (CITU), REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
              REGISTRATION NO. 66/78, NEAR FCI DEPOT, ANGAMALY,
              ERNAKULAM 683572

    4         SAJEEV C.S, CHANDRAPALLY HOUSE, KUTHIYATHODU P.O,
              CHELATHURUTHU, ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM 683594

    5         JOY K.T, KAKKASSERY HOUSE, KALADY P.O, MAROTTYCHUVADU,
              ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM 683574

    6         THE DEPOT MANAGER, FCI GODOWN, SUPPLYCO, ANGAMALY P.O,
              ERNAKULAM 683572. (CORRECTED)

              (THE ADDRESS OF R6 IS CORRECTED BY DELETING THE WORD
              'SUPPLYCO' FROM THE ADDRESS OF 6TH RESPONDENT IN THE
              CAUSE TITLE OF THE WRIT PETITION AS PER ORDER DATED
              30/03/2021 IN I.A 1/2021 IN WP(C)5752/2021)
 WPC 5752/21
                                       2

    *7       THE KERALA CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD.,
             MAVELI BHAVAN, GANDHI NAGAR P.O., KADAVANTHRA,
             KOCHI-682020, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING
             DIRECTOR.

    *8       THE DEPOT MANAGER, SUPPLYCO TALUK DEPOT,
             MUNNAR, COLONY ROAD, MUNNAR P.O., IDUKKI
             DISTRICT-685612.

             (ADDITIONAL R7 AND R8 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER
             DATED 08/04/2021 IN IA 3/21 IN WPC NO.5752/2021)

             BY ADVS.
             SRI.K.S.ARUN KUMAR
             SRI.E.C.BINEESH - GP
             SRI.K.R.KRISHNAKUMARI - SC
             SMT.MOLLY JACOB - SC


      THIS     WRIT   PETITION   (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION     ON   09.09.2021,   THE   COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WPC 5752/21
                                        3



                               JUDGMENT

The petitioner is stated to be a Contractor

under the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation

('SUPPLYCO') for lifting and transportation of

rationed articles from the Food Corporation of

India (FCI) godowns with respect to Adimali and

Devikulam Taluks. He says that he has been awarded

with Ext.P1 agreement, under which, he is obliged

to provide a list of vehicles, along with

personnel, for transportation of articles; but

that when he was engaged in such, he was

obstructed by respondents 3 to 5, asserting that

the members of the 3rd respondent alone have the

right to engage in such activities.

2. The petitioner submits that respondents 3

to 5 can obtain no such right at all under any

Statute and that, therefore, he was constrained to

approach the 2nd respondent - Circle Inspector of WPC 5752/21

Police, Angamaly, through Ext.P2 seeking

protection to him, his employees and for his fleet

of lorries, from any act of violence, intimidation

or threat at the hands of respondents 3 to 5 or

their men. He says that since the 2nd respondent

did not act in terms of Ext.P2 request, he has

been constrained to approach this Court through

this Writ Petition and prays that said respondent

be directed to afford protection to him, his

employees and vehicles engaged in carrying on the

activities as per Ext.P1 agreement.

3. I have heard Sri.V.A.Vinod - learned

counsel for the petitioner; Sri.K.S.Arun Kumar -

learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 to 5;

Smt.K.R.Krishna Kumari - learned Standing Counsel

for the FCI; Smt.Molly Jacob - learned Standing

Counsel appearing for the 'SUPPLYCO'; and

Sri.E.C.Bineesh - learned Government Pleader

appearing for respondents 1 and 2.

4. Sri.E.C.Bineesh - learned Government WPC 5752/21

Pleader, submitted that a statement has been filed

on record, wherein, it has been averred that the

allegations of the petitioner are not fully

correct, but that Police are willing to afford him

and his employees, as also his vehicles,

protection from any threats, including from

respondents 3 to 5 or their men. He added that the

Police are already keeping constant vigil and

consequently, that there are no law and order

issues now, as has been alleged by the petitioner

at this time.

5. Sri.K.S.Arun Kumar - learned counsel for

respondents 3 to 5, also affirmed that his clients

have not committed or do not intend to commit any

act which is in violation of law and that they

have not obstructed the petitioner or his vehicles

in any manner as has been alleged. He submitted

that the allegations in this Writ Petition are

malafide and therefore, prayed that this Writ

Petition be dismissed.

WPC 5752/21

6. Smt.Molly Jacob - learned Standing Counsel

for the 'SUPPLYCO' confirmed that Ext.P1 Agreement

had been entered into by her client with the

petitioner and that he is obliged as per its

terms, to maintain a fleet of lorries of his own

for lifting and transportation of rationed

articles from the FCI godowns. She, therefore,

prayed that this Writ Petition be allowed as

prayed for by the petitioner.

7. Smt.K.R.Krishnakumari - learned Standing

Counsel for the FCI submitted that her client has

no role to play in this Writ Petition since it is

the obligation of the State of Kerala, under the

provisions of the National Food Security Act, 2013

to ensure that the rationed articles are lifted

from the FCI godowns through Authorised Agencies.

She submitted that, therefore, if Ext.P1 has been

entered into by the SUPPLYCO - which is the

Authorised Agency as nominated by the Government

under the said Act - with the petitioner, then WPC 5752/21

certainly he has the right to act as per its terms

and that she has nothing further to add in this

case.

8. When I evaluate the afore submissions, it

is without doubt that the fact of Ext.P1 Agreement

between the SUPPLYCO and the petitioner is not

contested. As per its terms, the petitioner is

obligated to lift and transport rationed articles

from the FCI godowns, under the directions of the

SUPPLYCO and this cannot be impeded by any person

or entity, including respondents 3 to 5.

Pertinently, even Sri.K.S.Arun Kumar - learned

counsel for respondents 3 to 5, does not have a

case that his clients have any vested right to

conduct the transporting activity mentioned in

Ext.P1; and in any event of the matter, after

2016, when the State of Kerala nominated the

SUPPLYCO as the Authorised Agency under the

National Food Security Act, 2013 only person or

entities chosen by them can transport the articles WPC 5752/21

meant for public distribution.

9. I am, therefore, certain that the Police

Authorities are bound to grant adequate and

effective protection to the petitioner from threat

or intimidation from any person, including

respondents 3 to 5, when he continues his

activities as per Ext.P1 Agreement.

Resultantly, I allow this Writ Petition and

direct respondents 1 and 2 to ensure that the

petitioner, his employees and his fleet of

vehicles, as mentioned in the appendix to Ext.P1

Agreement, are allowed to operate in terms of the

same and that any threat or intimidation from any

source, including from respondents 3 to 5, are

averted and dealt with in terms of law, thus

ensuring that there is no violation of law and

order or infraction of peace in future.

Sd/-

RR                                                 DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
                                                           JUDGE
 WPC 5752/21


                APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5752/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1            TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO

BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND SUPPLYCO DATED 22-02-2021.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 25-02-2021.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 24-02-2021.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT EVIDENCING ACCEPTANCE OF EXHIBIT P3 AT THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 25-02-2021.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 12/03/2021 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 12/03/2021.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15/03/2021.

EXHIBIT P7(A) TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 15/03/2021.

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT DATED 16/03/2021 ENTERED INTO BETWEEN PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 4 AND 5. WPC 5752/21

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT R2(A) A TRUE COPY OF THE PARTICULARS WITH REGARD TO OF VEHICLE BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KL-35-2718 IS OWNED BY SMT.ELSY PAUL.

EXHIBIT R2(B) A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 11/03/2021 SUBMITTED BY SMT. ELSY PAUL BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT R2(C) A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 19/03/2021 SUBMITTED BY SMT. ELSY PAUL BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT.