Classic Industries And Exports ... vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 19961 Ker

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                        PRESENT

                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

         FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 2ND ASWINA, 1943

                                WP(C) NO. 18695 OF 2021

PETITIONER:

               CLASSIC INDUSTRIES AND EXPORTS LTD.
               RUBBER PARK, VALAYANCHIRANAGARA P.O., PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM
               DIST. - 683 556, KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS GR.MANAGER - FINANCE
               AND COMMERCIAL, SHRI.MANOJ K.B.

               BY ADVS.
               E.K.NANDAKUMAR (SR.)
               M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
               K.JOHN MATHAI
               JOSON MANAVALAN
               KURYAN THOMAS
               PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM
               RAJA KANNAN
               JAI MOHAN



RESPONDENTS:

     1         STATE OF KERALA
               REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT,
               THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

     2         STATION HOUSE OFFICER
               KUNNATHUNADU POLICE STATION, PATTIMATTOM, ERNAKULAM - 683 562,
               KERALA.

     3         SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
               KUNNATHUNADU POLICE STATION, PATTIMATTOM, ERNAKULAM - 683 562,
               KERALA.

     4         RUBBER PARK EMPLOYEES UNION (CITU)
               AIRAPURAM, NORTH MAZHUVANOOR P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM
               DIST. - 683 541, KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

     5         ANEESH THAMBAN
               PROPRIETOR, NEW LITE KOTTAMALIL BUILDING, ALLAPRA, PERUMBAVOOR,
               PIN - 683 542, KERALA.

     6         SIDIQUE V.A.
               1282, VALIYAVEETTIL, KUDILIL NAGAR ROAD, ERNAKULAM - 683 104,
               KERALA.

               BY ADVS.
               K.S.ARUN KUMAR
               P.RAMAKRISHNAN
 WP(C) NO. 18695 OF 2021

                                     2



            PREETHI RAMAKRISHNAN (P-212)
            C.ANIL KUMAR
            ASHA K.SHENOY
            T.C.KRISHNA
            PRATAP ABRAHAM VARGHESE



OTHER PRESENT:

            SI. E.C. BINEESH - GP




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.09.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 18695 OF 2021

                                   3




                            JUDGMENT

The petitioner is stated to be a Company registered under the

provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and they say that they had

earlier entered into Ext.P1 agreement with the 5 th respondent for

'fork lift services', but that since the said respondent thereafter,

sought termination of the said agreement on account of financial

crisis faced by them, they were forced to contract with the 6 th

respondent for aforementioned services.

2. The petitioner says that, however, the members of the 4 th

respondent - Union, who were earlier engaged by the 5 th

respondent, began to illegally cause obstruction to their activities

claiming that they are liable to be engaged by the 6 th respondent

also. The petitioner says that they had, therefore, no other option

but to approach respondents 2 and 3, through Ext.P5, seeking

protection and alleges that they did not take any action thereon;

thus now having been constrained to approach this Court through

this writ petition. They, therefore, pray that respondents 2 and 3 be

directed to afford them and their employees sufficient and adequate

protection from the obstructionist activities of the members of the

4th respondent.

WP(C) NO. 18695 OF 2021

3. I have heard Sri.Nandakumar, learned Senior Counsel,

instructed by Sri.Gopikrishnan Nambiar, appearing for the

petitioner; Sri.P.Ramakrishnan, learned counsel appearing for the

6th respondent; Sri.Arunkumar, learned counsel appearing for the

4th respondent and Sri.E.C.Bineesh, learned Government Pleader

appearing for the official respondents.

4. I notice that when this matter was heard by this Court for

admission on 10.09.2021, the following interim order had been

issued:

"xxxxxx List this case on 16.09.2021; until which time, the 2nd respondent - Station House Officer will ensure that law and order is maintained in this area where the petitioner is engaged on their business and that they are able to conduct their activities without any let or hindrance from respondent No.4"

5. Sri.Nandakumar, learned Senior Counsel, submitted that

in obedience to the afore directions, the Police have afforded WP(C) NO. 18695 OF 2021

effective protection to his client, as also to the 6 th respondent and

their employees; but that the members of the 4 th respondent have

now devised a new method of obstruction, by preventing the

employees from entering the factory at the main gate of the

Industrial Park, where the petitioner is situated. He prayed that,

therefore, the police be also directed to ensure that such

obstructions are averted.

6. Sri.P.Ramakrishnan, learned counsel appearing for the

6th respondent, supported the petitioner and prayed that the reliefs

sought for in this writ petition be granted, because his client's

obligation under their contract will otherwise be frustrated.

7. Sri.Arunkumar, learned counsel appearing for the 4 th

respondent, submitted that there are several labour issues now

raised by his client before the competent Authority, under the

provisions of the Industrial Disptues Act (ID Act) and that

conciliation proceedings have already been commenced. He,

however, added that his client or their members are not committing

any unlawful activities or causing any obstruction, as alleged by the

petitioner and thus prayed that this writ petition be dismissed.

8. When I evaluate the afore submissions, it is clear, that on WP(C) NO. 18695 OF 2021

one hand, the 4th respondent maintains that there are subsisting

labour issues; between the parties; while on the other, the

petitioner asserts that the members of the 4 th respondent cannot

demand to be engaged by the 6 th respondent since they are acting

under a new contract and not as per the agreement earlier entered

into by the 5th respondent.

9. Obviously, therefore, the afore issues are in the realm of

the 'ID Act' and it is pertinent that the 4 th respondent themselves

admit that they have invoked suitable remedies under the said Act,

before the competent Authority.

10. It is indubitable that the 4 th respondent or their members

cannot take law into their own hands, and will have to abide by the

proceedings under the ID Act, since they themsevles had invoked it.

In the afore circumstances, I allow this writ petition and

confirm the interim order dated 10.09.2021; consequentially

directing respondents 2 and 3 to ensure that adequate and effective

protection is given to the petitioner, the 6 th respondent and their

employees and assets, from any obstruction or intimidation or

threat to be caused or meted out by any person, including the

members of the 4th respondent. The Police Authorities will also WP(C) NO. 18695 OF 2021

ensure that the main gates of the Industrial Park, wherein the

petitioner - Company is situated, is also adequately watched and

that their employees or that of the 6 th respondent are not obstructed

at that point, in any manner, by members of the 4 th respondent or

their men.

Needless to say, the petitioner will fully co-operate with any

compilation proceedings, which is to be initiated or has been

initiated by the competent Authority under the ID Act and they will

act as per its terms, subject to their rights, available in law.

This writ petition is thus ordered.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE rp WP(C) NO. 18695 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18695/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 01/04/2021.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 07/08/2021 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S LETTER DATED 10/08/2021 TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PURCHASE ORDER DATED 07/09/2021 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 6TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST FOR POLICE PROTECTION DATED 10/09/2021 MADE BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.