Disposed

Travancore Blue Metal Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Kerala HC21 Mar 2014WP(C)/8190/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the petitioner, a quarry and metal crusher unit, complained of threats and disruption by the fourth respondent and his supporters demanding illegal fees. The court found the petitioner under threat and directed the responding police officers to provide effective and adequate police protection.

What did the court decide?

Direct respondent-police to provide effective and adequate police protection, whenever the petitioner needs such protection.

Travancore Blue Metal Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Sub… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE DR. MANJULA CHELLUR & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH 2014/30TH PHALGUNA, 1935

¶5

WP(C).No. 8190 of 2014 (W)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

TRAVANCORE BLUE METAL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., HOUSE NO. 10/168, KADAMPANAD, CHERIYAKONNI.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 013. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, P.V. SURESHKUMAR,AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. SREEDHARAN NAIR, PALAKKAVIL HOUSE, ANNAKARA.P.O., THRISSUR-680 508.

¶8

BY SRI.P.K.SURESH KUMAR,SENIOR ADVOCATE ADV.SRI.K.P.SUDHEER

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ARUVIKKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 564.

¶11

2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

¶12

NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 541.

¶13

3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,

¶14

NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 541.

¶15

4. VINOD @ PRAVU VINOD,S/O. THANKAPPAN,

¶16

AGED 30 YEARS,HOUSE NO. KP 6/416, PUTHENVEEDU,

¶17

THOPPIL, ATTARIKATH, KARAKULAM, KOOTTAPPARA,

¶18

CHAKKAKONAMMURI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT,

¶19

PIN-695 564.

¶20

R1 TO R3 BY SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SUJITH MATHEW JOSE

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-03-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

sts

¶23

WP(C).No. 8190 of 2014 (W)

¶24

APPENDIX

¶25

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶26

P1. TRUE COPY OF LICENCE NO. A6/98-13-14 DATED 2-7-2013 ISSUED BY ARUVIKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT TO THE PETITIONERS CRUSHER UNIT ALONG WITH ITS TRANSLATION.

¶27

P2. THE TRUE COPY OF LICENCE NO. A6-01/13-14 DATED 1-4-2013 ISSUED BY ARUVIKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT TO THE PETITIONER'S QUARRY ALONG WITH ITS TRANSLATION.

¶28

P3. TRUE COPY OF THE 'INTEGRATED CONSENT TO OPERATE' ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD DATED 14-7-2011 IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER.

¶29

P4. TRUE COPY OF THE 'CONSENT TO OPERATE' ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD DATED 26-6-2013 IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER.

¶30

P5. TRUE COPY OF LICENCE ISSUED BY JOINT CHIEF CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES, SOUTH CIRCLE CHENNAI TO THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH COVERING LETTER DATED 10-3-2014.

¶31

P6. TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF QUARRYING LEASE NO. 3898/1/2010 DATED 4-10-2010 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.

¶32

P7. TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF QUARRYING LEASE NO. 3895/1/2010 DATED 4-10-2010 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.

¶33

P8. TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF QUARRYING LEASE NO. 3894/1/2010 DATED 4-10-2010 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.

¶34

P9. TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF QUARRYING LEASE NO. 3897/1/2010 DATED 4-10-2010 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.

¶35

P10. TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF QUARRYING LEASE NO. 2993/1/2010 DATED 28-7-2010 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.

¶36

P11. TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF QUARRYING LEASE NO. 3896/1/2010 DATED 4-10-2010 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.

¶37

P12. TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 14-3-2014 SUBMITTED BY THE MANAGER OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

2/-

sts

-2-

WP(C)NO.8190/2014

¶42

P12(A). ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT. P12.

¶43

P13. TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT DATED 14-3-2014 IN CRIME NO. 125/2014 OF ARUVIKKARA POLICE STATION.

¶44

P13(A). ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT. P13.

¶45

P14. TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 15-3-2014 SUBMITTED BY THE MANAGER OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶46

P14(A). ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT. P14.

¶47

P15. TRUE COPY OF FIRST INFORMATION REPORT DATED 16-3-2014 IN CRIME NO. 130/2014 OF ARUVIKKARA POLICE STATION.

¶48

P15(A). ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT. P15.

¶49

P16. TRUE COPY OF FIRST INFORMATION REPORT DATED 17-3-2014 I CRIME NO. 133/2014 OF ARUVIKKARA POLICE STATION.

¶50

P16(A). ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P16.

¶51

P17. TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 18-3-2014 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE STATE POLICE CHIEF.

¶52

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO.JUDGE

sts

MANJULA CHELLUR,C.J. &

¶57

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.

¶58

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(c) No.8190 of 2014 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 21st day of March, 2014

¶59

JUDGMENT

¶60

Manjula Chellur,CJ

¶61

Petitioner is before us who is having a quarry and metal crusher unit. According to learned Government Pleader, petitioner has valid permits to run the said business.

¶62

The main grievance of the petitioner is, 4^th respondent along with his supporters are creating hindrance to the business of petitioner with a demand of `150/- for every truck when the petitioner is under no obligation to comply with such demand.

¶63

Learned Government Pleader submits, 4^th respondent, on the complaint of petitioner, is already arrested and he also admits registration of several cases against 4^th respondent. However, according to State Attorney, many supporters and group members of 4^th respondent are outside and the phone calls must be from those persons and not from 4^th respondent.

¶64

W.P.(c) No.8190 of 2014

¶65

¶66

However, the fact remains, petitioner is under threat and disturbance at the hands of supporters of 4^th respondent.

¶67

In the light of such existence of facts, we direct respondent-police to provide effective and adequate police

¶68

protection, whenever petitioner needs such protection.

¶69

With these observations, this writ petition is disposed of.

¶70

MANJULA CHELLUR, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶71

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE.

¶72

sj21/03

Travancore Blue Metal Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Travancore Blue Metal Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Commissioner of Income Tax,Trichur Vs Sri.P.M.Abbobacker,Chavakkad,Trichur

The Peninsular Plantations Ltd., Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

M/S. Coastal Resorts (India) Ltd. Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

K.T.Shaji Vs the State of Kerala

P.M.Mahinkutty Vs the Circle Inspector of Police

Abdulla Vs the Director General of Police