Kerala High Court
Mohammed Irfan V.P vs The Station House Officer on 11 April, 2024
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 13222 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
MOHAMMED IRFAN V.P.
AGED 26 YEARS
S/O V.P. ALAVI, MANAGING PARTNER, V.P.M. AGENCIES,
X/449, A3, THOTTUNGAL, UNIVERSITY ROAD,
RAMANATTUKARA, KOZHIKODE - 673633, RESIDING AT V.P.
HOUSE, THIRUVANGATTU THADATHIL, CHELEMBRA,
TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM,, PIN - 673634
BY ADV R.RAMADAS
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
FEROKE POLICE STATION, FEROKE, KOZHIKODE, PIN -
673631
2 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, KOZHIKODE, PIN
- 673001
3 HEADLOAD WORKERS UNION
THOTTUNGAL AREA, NEAR V.P. TRADELINKS, THOTTUNGAL,
RAMANATTUKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY
ITS SECRETARY., PIN - 673633
BY ADV K.S.ARUN KUMAR
SRI.P.M.SHAMEER, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 13222 OF 2024
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is stated to be the Managing Partner of a
business entity and that he is conducting grocery business, as
also the sale of food items and packing materials, in an area
which is not within a "Scheme" covered by any notification
under the Kerala Headload Workers Act ('the Act' for short).
He says that he has two registered workers, both holding
authorisation under Rule 26 A, issued by the Assistant Labour
Officer, Feroke which is evident from Ext.P1 series; but that
he and such men are being obstructed regularly by the 3 rd
respondent - Union and their men, for untenable reasons,
making usurious demands. He says that, he, therefore,
preferred Ext.P2 complaint before the 1 st respondent; but that
since it has evoked no response, he has been constrained to
approach this Court through this Writ Petition.
2. Sri.R.Ramdas - learned counsel for the petitioner,
pertinently conceded that there has been a mistake in filing
this Writ Petition because, Ext.P2 is not the document that
has been referred to in its Memorandum. He explained that,
WP(C) NO. 13222 OF 2024
Ext.P2 happens to be that of another person; but argued that,
nevertheless, his client had approached the Police and had
requested for protection. He, thus reiteratedly prayed that the
reliefs sought for in this Writ Petition be granted, particularly
because the area in question is not covered by a Scheme
under the 'Act'.
3. Crucially, Sri.K.S.Arun Kumar - learned Standing
Counsel for the 3rd respondent - Board, unequivocally
conceded that the place where the petitioner 's business is
being carried on, is not covered by a Scheme under the 'Act'.
He, however, submitted that when the petitioner has no
registered workers, he has to rely upon the members of the
statutory 'Pool', who are all attached to his client's Union. He,
thus prayed that this Writ Petition be dismissed.
4. Sri.P.M.Shameer - learned Government Pleader,
interestingly, did not support the submissions of the 3rd
respondent, saying that since the petitioner has two
registered workers, which is evident from Ext.P1 series and
since the area is not covered by a Scheme under the 'Act', the
Police are giving them necessary protection from any threat
and intimidation. He reiterated that the petitioner is,
WP(C) NO. 13222 OF 2024
therefore, now facing no impediment in the loading and
unloading activities in his business and that the Police will
ensure it on a continuous basis.
5. I must say that there is great force in the afore
submissions of the learned Government Pleader because,
when it is conceded by the 3 rd respondent that the petitioner
is carrying on business in an area which is not covered by a
Scheme under the 'Act', they obtain no right to claim
employment, or to cause any obstruction to the activities of
the petitioner, or its registered headload workers. The factum
of the petitioner having two registered headload workers is
indubitable - as is admitted - from Ext.P1 series; and in such
circumstances, I am certain that the petitioner is entitled to
relief.
In the afore circumstances, I record the submissions of
the learned Government Pleader and dispose of this Writ
Petition; consequently, directing the 1st respondent to ensure
that law and order is always maintained and that the
petitioner and his registered workers - covered by Ext.P1
series - are afforded necessary and effective protection from
the 3rd respondent union and its member/men, while carrying
WP(C) NO. 13222 OF 2024
on their work; and that none of them is allowed to take law
units their hands, or to commit breach of peace in future.
Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
lsn
WP(C) NO. 13222 OF 2024
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13222/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED
TO ABOOBACKER, PERMANENT WORKER OF THE
PETITIONER
Exhibit P1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD OF THE
PERMANENT WORKER OF THE PETITIONER
ASHRAF V.P.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
26.03.2024 FILED BEFORE THE
RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 BY THE PETITIONER
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL
TRUE COPY
P.A TO JUDGE
LSN
