Dismissed

K.v.Raju v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Apr 2013WP(C)/7809/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged police harassment obstructing his practice as a Health Advisor. Finding no case made out for interference based on precedent, the Court dismissed the writ petition but noted the petitioner may approach concerned authorities.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed with an observation that the petitioner may approach concerned authorities to establish his credentials.

K.v.Raju Vs State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2013/13TH CHAITHRA 1935

¶5

WP(C).No. 7809 of 2013 (A)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

K.V.RAJU, AGED 55 YEARS S/O.VELU, RESIDING AT KOCHUTHAYYIL HOUSE MARARIKULAM SOUTH P.O, ALAPPUZHA.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.AYYAPPAN SANKAR SRI.JAYAN JOHN SMT.S.HRIDYA

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶12

3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANNANCHERI, ALAPPUZHA.

¶13

BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER RI.M.K.ABOOBACKER

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-04-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

tss

¶16

WP(C).No. 7809 of 2013 (A)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶19

EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION DATED 28.2.2009 ISSUED IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER BY THE INDIAN COUNCIL OF ALTERNATIVE MEDICINES, WEST BENGAL.

¶20

EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTO IDENTITY CARD ISSUED IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER BY THE INDIAN COUNCIL OF ALTERNATIVE MEDICINES, WEST BENGAL ON 28.2.09.

¶21

EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF THE PROSPECTUS OF INDIAN COUNCIL OF ALTERNATIVE MEDICINES.

¶22

EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 2.2.12 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WPC NO. 2051/2012.

¶23

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

tss

K. M. JOSEPH & K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JJ.

¶29

---------------------------------------------W.P.(C). NO. 7809 OF 2013 A ----------------------------------------------Dated this the 3rd April, 2013

¶30

JUDGMENT

¶31

K.M. Joseph, J.

¶32

Petitioner has approached this Court complaining of alleged harassment by police. The relief sought is as follows:

¶33

“Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 3^rd respondent to desist from unnecessarily harassing, interfering with, obstructing and hindering in any manner with the petitioner's vocation as Health Advisor in IndoAllopathy at Bernad Jn., Pathirappally P.O., Mannanchery, Alappuzha, in Alternative System of indigenously developed, time tested and harmless herbal medicine as per Ext.P1 Certificate of Registration.”

¶34

Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows:

¶35

Petitioner is deeply aggrieved by the highhanded and illegal

¶36

WP(C).NO.7809/13 A

¶37

¶38

acts of abuse of power by the 3^rd respondent Circle Inspector of Police to harass and forcibly obstruct the smooth functioning of petitioner's Health Advice Centre in Indo-Allopathy Alternative System of Medicine at Bernad Jn., Pathirappally PO, Mannanchery, Alappuzha and the practice of the petitioner as a Health Advisor in Alternative System of indigenously developed, time tested and harmless herbal medicines as per Ext.P1 Certificate of Registration. There is also total inaction of the higher ups in taking appropriate action against 3^rd respondent's conduct of illegally depriving and infringing petitioner's fundamental right to carry on his profession as an approved Health Advisor in indigenous herbal medicines and right to earn his livelihood, by forcibly preventing him otherwise than in accordance with law by abusing his authority. Hence being left with no other alternative efficacious remedy, the petitioner is before us.

¶39

We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

¶40

Learned Government Pleader would point out the

¶41

WP(C).NO.7809/13 A

¶42

¶43

unreported Judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in W.P. (C).No.524/12. Following the same, we find that there is no case

¶44

made out for interference by this Court and the Writ Petition is dismissed. We only make it clear that it is open to the petitioner to approach the concerned authorities to establish his right and credentials and to pursue the practice based on Ext.P1.

¶45

Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH

¶46

JUDGE

¶47

Sd/= K. RAMAKRISHNAN JUDGE

¶48

kbk.

¶49

//True copy//

K.v.Raju v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.v.Raju v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.Indus Towers Ltd. Vs the Superintendent of Police, Malappuram

G.Valsalakumari Vs Circle Inspector of Police

K.S.Mohanan Pillai Vs the District Police Chief, Pathanamthitta

C.a.Salomy Vs State of Kerala

Narayanan Vs the Superintendent of Police

K.Devan Vs the District Superintendent of Police, Palakkad