Disposed

M/S Vodafone Idea Limited, v. Station House Officer

Kerala HC20 Jan 2020WP(C)/41/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought police protection for its Kakkanad office alleging threat of strike and obstruction by respondents. The High Court disposed of the petition noting the strike proposal was withdrawn and directed petitioners to approach local police if obstruction occurs.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed; directed petitioner to approach Station House Officer for protection if obstruction or threat occurs.

M/S Vodafone Idea Limited, Vs Station House Officer — Municipal and Town Planning | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 30TH POUSHA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.41 OF 2020(E)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

M/S VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED(FORMERLY KNOWN AS IDEA CELLULAR LTD), VJ TOWER, SERVICE ROAD, VYTILLA P.O.ERNAKULAM-682 019,

¶8

REP BY ITS HEAD LEGAL (NODAL OFFICER), RAJESH M.V, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O M.V.RAGHAVAN, RESIDING AT VILLA NO 42, ASSET KASAVU, TOG ROAD, SOUTH KALAMASSERY, COCHIN.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.P.SATHISAN

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, TRIKKAKKARA POLICE STATION, PALARIVATTOM P.O., PIN-682 025.

¶12

2 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, THRIKKAKARA, KAKKANAD, KERALA-682 021.

¶13

3 SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC IT BUSINESS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, MARWAH HOUSE, SECOND FLOOR, KRISHNALAL MARWAH MARG, ANDHERI EAST, MUMBAI-400 072.

¶14

4 INTUC, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT K.K.IBRAHIM KUTTY, INTUC BHAVAN, INTUC ROAD, VALANHAMBALAM, KOCHIN-682 016.

¶15

5 ARUNKUMAR K.V, GENERAL SECRETARY, INTUC BHAVAN, INTUC ROAD, VALANHAMBALAM, KOCHI-682 016.

¶16

6 DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF DEPUTY CHIEF LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL), KENDRIYA SHRAM SADAN, KAKKANAD P.O., PIN-682 030.

¶17

7 ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER, OFFICE OF DEPUTY CHIEF LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL), KENDRIYA SHARAM SADAN, KAKKANAD P.O., PIN-682 030.

¶18

WP(C).No.41 OF 2020

¶19

¶20

8 EBIN XAVIER, S/O XAVIER, MOOTHEDATH HOUSE, OCHANTHURUTH P.O. KOCHI, ERNAKULAM, KERALA-682 508.

¶21

9 JOHNSON V.J, S/O JOSEPH, VALIYAPURACKAL, CHELAKKOMBU P.O. KOTTAYAM-686 540.

¶22

10 KRISHNAKUMAR, S/O RADHAKRISHNA MENON, KADAMBANATTU HOUSE, PAZHANGANADU, KIZHAKKAMBALAM P.O. ERNAKULAM-683 562.

¶23

11 AKHIL P.K, S/O KUNJU P.N, PUNATHIL, KADAYIRUPPU, NEAR GOVT.HOSPITAL, KADAYIRUPPU, KOLENCHERY VIA, ERNAKULAM-682 311.

¶24

12 DANY GOMEZ, S/O M.S.EASY, MACHNGAL HOUSE, CHELLANAM P.O. COCHIN-682 008.

¶25

13 BIBIN GOPAL, S/O GOPALAN K.K, KULATHAICHIRA THALAYAZHAM P.O. VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM-686 607.

¶26

14 UNNIKRISHNAN C, S/O CHANDRASEKHARA MENON, PANACKAL THODANAL P.O. KOTTAYAM-686 573.

¶27

SRI.P.P.THAJUDHEEN, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶28

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶29

WP(C).No.41 OF 2020

¶30

¶31

JUDGMENT

¶32

This writ petition is filed seeking police protection for the conduct of the office of the petitioner at Kakkanad. The contention of the petitioner was that the respondents had threatened a strike and are obstructing the functioning of the office.

¶33

An Interim Order had been rendered on 06.01.2020 directing the

¶34

Police to provide necessary police protection for the functioning of the office. Respondents 4 and 5 have not entered appearance in spite of receipt of the notice.

¶35

The learned Government Pleader submits that, on being summoned, respondents 4 and 5 had submitted that the proposal for the strike is withdrawn and that they are not causing any obstruction.

¶36

In the above view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of. In case the petitioner faces any obstruction or threat from the party respondents or any other quarters, they shall approach the Station House Officer, who shall afford the necessary protection or take appropriate action.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN

JUDGE

WP(C).No.41 OF 2020

¶42

¶43

APPENDIX

¶44

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶45

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF LICENCE AGREEMENT OF PETITIONER COMPANY. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF TERMS OF SERVICE ON PRINCIPAL TO PRINCIPAL BASIS BETWEEN PETITIONER AND 3RD RESPONDENT REGARDING ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT MONITORING SERVICES DATED 13.3.2018 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE POLICE AUTHORITIES DATED 3.1.2020 EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF EXT P3 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF PROTEST. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN WPC NO 28786/2019 DATED 28.10.2019

¶46

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL

M/S Vodafone Idea Limited, v. Station House Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Vodafone Idea Limited, v. Station House Officer

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

A.Subhash, Vs State of Kerala

M/S.Heera Construction Company Pvt. Ltd., Vs State of Kerala

Digin Varghese, Vs the Marriage Officer (Sub Registrar)

Ullattil Builders Vs the Divisional Railway Manager (Works)

Syam K.S, Vs State of Kerala

Dr.Amrutha K.Sadasivan Vs the President, Board of Governors