The court dismissed the petition for immediate police protection against a first respondent union after receiving an undertaking not to hold a sit-in protest, directing the petitioner to file a future complaint if the conduct recurs.
No immediate police protection granted; petitioner directed to complain if the union stages a future sit-in protest.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Writ Petition No.26909 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.09.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
Writ Petition No.26909 of 2023 and W.M.P.No.26333 of 2023
Hyundai Motor India Limited, Plot No.H-1, SIPCOT Industrial Park, Irrungattukottai, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District - 602 117. Represented by its Authorized Signatory
... Petitioner
Versus
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to provide police protection to the petitioner, its properties, men and materials at H-1, SIPCOT Industrial Park, Irrungattukottai, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram District for free movement of men and materials from the above premises and prevent occurrence of unlawful activities at the instance of the first Respondent, its members, men, agents or persons acting in the name of first Respondent.
1/6
Writ Petition No.26909 of 2023
| For Petitioner | : Mr.S.Ravindran, Senior Counsel for Mr.D.Abdullah |
|---|---|
| For Respondents |
: Mr.Sivakumar [R1] Mr.A.Damodaran |
| Additional Public Prosecutor [R2] ***** |
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the second respondent to
provide police protection in order to ensure free movement of men and
materials to and from the factory at H-1, SIPCOT Industrial Park, Irrungattukottai, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram District.
2. Heard Mr.S.Ravindran, learned Senior Counsel appearing for petitioner, Mr.Sivakumar, learned counsel appearing for first respondent and Mr.A.Damodaran, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for second respondent.
3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the first respondent union went on a strike and conducted a Dharna within the factory premises on 10.08.2023. Conciliation proceedings are pending before the Conciliation Officer. The Conciliation Officer had advised the striking employees to maintain
2/6
Writ Petition No.26909 of 2023
peace and not to disrupt the functioning of the factory. Accordingly, the
strike was withdrawn. Even thereafter, there was a sit in protest that was
conducted by the first respondent and once again, the Conciliation Officer has intervened through proceedings dated 08.09.2023. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the petitioner apprehends that the first respondent will once again indulge in a sit in protest and conciliation proceedings are now posted for hearing on 13.09.2023. Therefore, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court seeking for a direction to the second respondent police to provide police protection.
4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the
second respondent submitted that as on date, there is no sit in protest conducted by the first respondent.
5. Learned counsel, who took notice on behalf of the first respondent, submitted that the first respondent had already shown their protest and now the matter is attempted to be conciliated and an amicable solution will be arrived at between the parties. Learned counsel, therefore, submitted that the first respondent do not intend to once again
go on a sit in protest in the factory premises.
3/6
Writ Petition No.26909 of 2023
6. In the light of the above submission, this Court is of the fond
and the second respondent shall act upon the same and deal with the complaint in line with the judgment of this Court Hindustan Motor Finance Corporation Ltd. v. Superintendent of Police, Thiruvallur and
others [ 2019 (3) LLN 749 (Mad.) ] .
This Writ Petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
12.09.2023
Note to office: Issue order copy by 13.09.2023
Index: Yes/No Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order Neutral Citation: Yes / No
rjr/gm
4/6
Writ Petition No.26909 of 2023
To
5/6
Writ Petition No.26909 of 2023
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J
gm
Writ Petition No.26909 of 2023
12.09.2023
6/6
2 issues framed by the court
Whether police protection must be granted now or left open for future sit-in protests.
Whether the petition allows for future complaints if the union resorts to protest.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Hindustan Motor Finance Corporation Ltd. v. Superintendent of Police, Thiruvallur and othersFollowed¶38
Hindustan Motor Finance Corporation Ltd. v. Superintendent of Police, Thiruvallur and others [2019 (3) LLN 749 (Mad.)]
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Hyundai Motor India Limited
The Secretary, Hyundai Motor India Employees Union
The Inspector of Police, Sriperumbudur Police Station
N. ANAND VENKATESH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
