Disposed

Sheejamol v. the Director General of Police

Kerala HC6 Jul 2021WP(C)/9549/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged alleged obstruction by Lorry Driver's Associations preventing the petitioner from transporting liquor. The court held that no interference is allowed and directed the correct jurisdictional police station to ensure safe transportation without obstruction.

What did the court decide?

The Station House Officer of Pulikeezhu Police Station was directed to ensure the petitioner could transport materials without obstruction by the respondents.

Sheejamol Vs the Director General of Police — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

WP(C) NO. 9549 OF 2021

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶6

TUESDAY, THE 6^TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 15TH ASHADHA, 1943

¶7

WP(C) NO. 9549 OF 2021

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

SHEEJAMOL, AGED 47 YEARS, W/O BINOI GEORGE, CHERUKARA HOUSE, EROOR WEST, TRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM-682306.(FL03/E.120/2020-21), KOTTAVATHIL RESTAURANT, ERNAKULAM, NEAR STATUE JUNCTION, TRIPUNITHURA.

¶10

BY ADVS. R.DIVAKARAN SRI.BINOI GEORGE (CHERUKARA)

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

1 THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, PATTAM P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004.

¶13

2 DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, RING ROAD, THAZHEVETTIPRAM P.O, PATHANAMTHITTA-689645.

¶14

3 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, THIRUVALLA POLICE STATION, THIRUVALLA.P.O, PATHANAMTHITTA-689101.

¶15

4 CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, KERALA STATE BEVERAGES CORPORATION, FL-9, WARE HOUSE, THIRUVALLA P.O, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA-689101.

¶16

5 MANAGER, KERALA STATE BEVERAGES CORPORATION, THIRUVALLA.P.O, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689101.

¶17

WP(C) NO. 9549 OF 2021

¶18

¶19

6 LORRY DRIVER'S ASSOCIATION, BHARATIYA MAZDOOR SANGH, KERALA STATE BEVERAGES CORPORATION, THIRUVALLA P.O, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689101, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶20

7 LORRY DRIVER'S ASSOCIATION, CITU, KERALA STATE BEVERAGES CORPORATION, THIRUVALLA P.O, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689101, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶21

SRI P P THAJUDEEN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

WP(C) NO. 9549 OF 2021

¶24

¶25

JUDGMENT

¶26

The petitioner states that she is the FL-3 License holder of Kottavathil Restaurant functioning near Statue Junction, Tripunithura. She has two vehicles that are being used for transportation of liquor from the warehouse of the Kerala State Beverages Corporation to the establishment of the petitioner. She contends that on 19.03.2021, when the petitioner attempted to transport the liquor from the warehouse, the vehicle was obstructed by the party respondents. The employees of the petitioner were threatened and intimidated. The party respondents demanded that their vehicles be used for transportation of the load. In view of the fact that what was being transported was alcohol and as the petitioner has her own employees, their demand was not acceded to. However, the party respondents refused to budge from their demand. In the said circumstances, Ext.P7 complaint was lodged before the 5th respondent. Later, Exhibit P8 and P9 complaints were lodged before respondents 3 and 4 as well. However, no action has been taken. It is in the afore circumstances that the petitioner has approached this Court for a direction to the respondent Nos.1 to 3 to afford police protection to the life of the petitioner and her employees so as to enable them to transport liquor and beer purchased from the warehouse of the Kerala State Beverages

¶27

WP(C) NO. 9549 OF 2021

¶28

¶29

Corporation to the licensed premises as per Ext.P1.

¶30

I have heard Sri.R.Divakaran, the learned counsel appearing

¶31

for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader. Though notice was issued to the party respondents and the same was served, none appears.

¶32

The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that on receipt of the complaint, respondents 6 and 7 were summoned and they were told that they have no authority to interfere with the transportation of alcohol from the warehouse to the establishment of the petitioner herein. It is further submitted that though the Station House Officer, Thiruvalla Police Station has been arrayed as the 3rd respondent, actually, the jurisdictional police officer is the Station House Officer, Pulikeezhu Police Station.

¶33

I have considered the submissions advanced. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondents 6 and 7 are obstructing the transportation of liquor from the warehouse to the petitioner’s establishment. Since the petitioner is having vehicles and employees of her own, it would not be open for the party respondents to demand work or to obstruct the transportation of the goods. If any obstruction is caused during the transportation of liquor on the strength of a valid permit, the

¶34

WP(C) NO. 9549 OF 2021

¶35

¶36

Station House Officer, Pulikeezhu Police Station shall ensure that the petitioner is able to transport the materials without any obstructions from

¶37

the party respondents.

¶38

This writ petition is disposed of.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶41

JUDGE

¶42

¶43

WP(C) NO. 9549 OF 2021

¶44

¶45

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9549/2021

¶46

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS:

¶47

EXHIBIT P1	THE TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE NO.FL-03 NO.E-120/2020-21 OF KOTTAVATHIL RESTAURANT.
EXHIBIT P2	THE TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF THE VEHICLE BEARING NO.KL- 39-D-3222.
EXHIBIT P3	THE TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF THE VEHICLE BEARING NO.KL- 39-E-5373.
EXHIBIT P4	THE TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT FOR TRANSPORT OF INTOXICATING LIQUOR.
EXHIBIT P5	THE TRUE COPY OF THE INVOICE (TAXABLE SALES) DATED 19.03.2021.
EXHIBIT P6	THE TRUE COPY OF THE INVOICE (TAXABLE SALES) DATED 19.03.2021.
EXHIBIT P7	THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 19.03.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER'S PURCHASE MANAGER JOMON PAUL BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P8	THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 31.03.2021.
EXHIBIT P9	THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 31.03.2021.

¶48

RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS: NIL

Sheejamol v. the Director General of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sheejamol v. the Director General 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

Santhamma J., Vs State of Kerala

Santhosh Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Santhosh Kumar Vs State of Kerala

K.D.Asokan Vs State of Kerala

Thresiamma Varghese Olikkara Vs Sub Registrar Changanassery

Amina Sheik Vs the Special Tahasildar(Land Acquisition)