Madras High Court
M/S.Ramco Super Leathers Limited vs The Industrial Tribunal on 18 December, 2014
Author: C.S.Karnan
Bench: C.S.Karnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18.12.2014 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.S.KARNAN W.P.No.33076 of 2014 and M.P.No.1 of 2014 M/s.Ramco Super Leathers Limited, Represented by its Director, Mr.S.Ramasamy, No.28, Dr.Alagappa Road, Purasawalkam, Chennai-600 084. .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The Industrial Tribunal, City Civil Court Buildings, Chennai-600 104. (Not necessary party hence given up) 2.The Superintendent of Police, Vellore District, Vellore. 3.The Inspector of Police, Virungeepuram Police Station, Virungeepuram, Vellore District. 4.R.Bhoopalan 5.G.Jeyakumar 6.T.Mahendran .. Respondents Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents herein to grant adequate police protection to the Petitioner's factory land and premises, namely, M/s.Ramco Super Leathers Limited, comprised in Survey Numbers 125/2A (New Survey No.125 2B2), 125/4D and 256/2B situated at No.1/167, Bangalore Road, Karugamputhur, Vellore Taluk and District. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Devnarenderan For Respondents : Mr.M.S.Ramesh (for R2 & R3) Additional Government Pleader O R D E R
The brief facts of the case are as follows:-
The writ petitioner submits that he is the Director of the Petitioner's Company. The Company is a Public Limited Company incorporated on 19.06.1998 under the Companies Act. The Company is involved in the processing of raw leather into finished leather for the purpose of manufacturing of footwear and allied products. Till the year 2003, there were about 280 workers engaged in the Company who were provided with statutory benefits viz. ESI, EPF, etc. The Company has been providing all the welfare measures much to the satisfaction of the workers and have been strictly complying with the procedures and provisions of the Factories Act and other Labour legislations.
2.The petitioner additionally submitted that the lands comprised in Survey Nos.125/2A2 (Old Survey No.125/2A) and 125/4D in Karugambathur Village and Survey No.256/2B in Konavattam Village belongs to the Petitioner company, having purchased the same through various sale deeds. The patta to the said properties stands in the name of Petitioner's predecessors-in-title. All the said properties are bordering and adjacent to each other and bear a common door No.1/167, Bangalore Road, Karugambathur Village, Vellore District. The Company has established their factory in the above said Survey Numbers. The Survey No.256/2B in Konavattam Village at No.1/167, Bangalore Road, Karugambathur Village. Apart from the constructed area, the western boundary and a part of the northern boundary of the said property does not have a compound wall, the rest of the property bears a compound wall.
3.He submits that the Company had availed huge loans from leading banks namely, Canara Bank, Indian Bank and ABN Amro Bank by mortgage of the movable and immovable properties. Due to the general recession in the leather market all over the world, the Company started to face huge financial crisis in its business leading to its inability to pay dues to various banks and other creditors. Owing to the default committed, the creditors have created charges over the Company's properties towards the outstanding liabilities of more than Rs.60 crores. He submits that many of the workers including the respondent Nos.4 to 6 herein filed individual petitions before the Labour Court, Vellore. A Trade Union of workers to which the respondents 4 to 6 are not connected with, raised an Industrial Dispute before the Industrial Tribunal, Chennai. The claimants in these disputes had primarily demanded that the factory be reopened and they be given work.
4.He submits that the Company has been defending these litigations in accordance with law. In the meantime, many workers submitted their resignations which were accepted by the Management and they were settled of their Provident Fund dues, etc. Further, about 195 of the workers had approached the Management for amicable settlement and accordingly after mutual discussions, the workers and the Management had entered into a Settlement on 26.09.2014 under Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 whereby their statutory dues were paid. He submits that about 43 Computation Petitions were ordered by the Labour Court, Vellore. The Management had filed a batch of Writ Petitions before this Court in W.P.No.14970 of 2013, etc., challenging the Computation Petitions as well as the Award of the Labour Court, Vellore in ID.No.46 of 2002. A Writ Appeal in WA.No.1131 of 2008 also came to be filed in connection with the aforesaid dispute. By an order dated 11.09.2012, this Court had reiterated the legal position and had set aside the orders in the Computation Petitions passed by the Labour Court, Vellore. Likewise, while passing orders on the batch of Writ Petitions on 18.09.2014, this Court had set aside the orders in the Computation petitions and the Award of the Industrial Tribunal and remanded the dispute back to the Industrial Tribunal for fresh disposal and the said dispute is now pending before the Industrial Tribunal, Chennai.
5.He submits that none of the workers of the Company including the respondents 4 to 6 herein have any valid, legal or executable claim against the Company. While that being so, these respondents had been indulging in various illegal activities causing disturbance to the Management. On 16.10.2014, these respondents had put up posters in and around the Sathuvachari Integrated Court Complex threatening self immolation. The Police Department had swung into action and posted a huge police force in front of the Court complex to avoid any untoward incidents inside the court compound. Despite the security accorded, the fourth respondent herein had jumped over the compound of the Court premises and doused himself with kerosene at which point of time, the police apprehended him and took him to custody along with the others who had illegally assembled outside the court complex. The incident was widely reported in the local newspapers. While that being so, he respectfully submits that on 27.10.2014, the respondents 4 to 6 herein along with some of the local residents of Karugambathur and Konavattam Villages where most of these workers are resident, had unlawfully attempted to demolish the compound of the Company's factory premises with the aid of a JCB. The security personnel stationed in the factory premises reported the matter to the Company's Head Office at Chennai and immediately a complaint was lodged before the third respondent herein on 27.10.2014 itself. The third respondent herein had immediately rushed to the Company premises and dispersed the unlawful mob and removed the JCB from the premises. The mob had also entered into a wordy duel with the police personnel during the incident and refused to move from the vicinity.
6.He submits that on 28.10.2014, the respondents 4 to 6 herein along with the local villagers of Karugambathur and Konavattam Villages had put up a notice in front of the Company's compound with a threat to take illegal possession of the lands belonging to the company. This incident was also widely reported in the local newspapers. They had put up small tents in the compound to execute their illegal motive. The security personnel were also intimidated owing to which they had quit their jobs for the safety of their lives. The intention of these respondents is to grab the company's immovable property and accordingly they had trespassed into the vacant land and illegally attempted to plot out the land. However, with the assistance of the local police, their unlawful attempt was thwarted and these respondents and their henchmen were forced to leave the Company's premises. He submits that since these respondents 4 to 6 herein along with the help of the local residents of Karugambathur and Konavattam Villages had been consistently creating nuisance and unrest in the Company's premises, the Petitioner herein had filed a suit in O.S.No.312 of 2014 before the District Munsif, Vellore and by an order dated 27.11.2014 passed in I.A.No.1193 of 2014 in O.S.No.312 of 2014, the District Munsif was pleased to grant an order of Interim Injunction restraining the respondents therein from gathering together or in any way demonstrating within 300 metres from the Petitioner's premises. As on date, the petitioner is yet to receive the certified copy of the order.
7.While that being so, on 03.12.2014 the petitioner herein wanted to construct a compound wall in the petitioner's premises at Survey Nos.125/2A2 (Old Survey No.125/2A) and 125/4D in Karugambathur Village and Survey No.256/2B in Konavattam Village situated at No.1/167, Bangalore Road, Karugambathur, Vellore Taluk and District, for which purpose they had attempted to unload the construction materials in the said premises. However, the respondents 4 to 6 along with the local residents of Karugambathur and Konavattam Villages, who were closely associated with these respondents, assembled in the petitioner's property and prevented them from putting up the construction. It is pertinent to mention here that the aforesaid workers had instigated the villagers of Karugambathur and Konavattam villages to join in their illegal action, though the villagers have no role to play in the dispute between the workers and the Management. Hence, the petitioner herein had given a complaint to the second and third respondents herein on 03.12.2014 complaining about the incident and sought for protection while putting up the construction of the compound wall. Under these circumstances, he submits that on 07.12.2014 at about 10.00 a.m., the respondents 4 to 6 along with their henchmen from the villages of Karugambathur and Konavattam had illegally assembled at the factory gate and had a meeting. Pursuant to that on 08.12.2014 at about 10.30 a.m., these respondents along with about 20 villagers of Karugambathur and Konavattam, had gathered in front of the residence of the petitioner's Manager Mr.Kumarappan and burnt an effigy and further threatened danger to his life. After the incident, the said Mr.Kumarappan had given a complaint to the third respondent herein on 08.12.2014 reporting the incident. However, the third respondent indicated that this was a labour dispute and in the absence of any specific order from the court, he expressed his inability to accord police protection.
8.The highly competent counsel Mr.A.Devnarenderan appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's company had purchased the lands comprised in various Survey Numbers situated at Karugambathur Village and Konavattam Village in Vellore District. Over the said land the Company had been established which is a Public Limited Company and registered under the Companies Act, wherein around 280 workers are engaged for the processing of raw leather into finished leather for the purpose of manufacturing footwear and allied products. In Survey No.256/2B in Konavattam Village at No.1/167, Bangalore Road, apart from the constructed area, the western portion of the premises is a vacant land. While the western boundary and a part of the northern boundary of the said property does not have a compound wall, the rest of the property bears a compound wall. The Company had mortgaged the movable and immovable properties with the Nationalised Bank and Scheduled Bank. The Company has been unable to remit the principal amount with accrued interest thereon to the Bank, hence the creditors have created a charge over the Company's properties towards the outstanding liabilities of over Rs.60 crores.
9.The very competent counsel additionally added that some of the workers had filed cases before the Labour Court, Vellore and Industrial Tribunal, Chennai and had claimed that the Company be reopened and they be given work. While so many of the workers submitted their resignations which were accepted by the Management and they were settled of their dues. Further, 195 of their workers had entered into a settlement with the Management as per the Industrial Dispute Act. As per the terms of the settlement, the workers statutory dues were paid. Further about 43 Computation Petitions were ordered by the Labour Court, Vellore. The Management had filed writ petition against the same Labour Court order and the same was allowed. As such none of the workers of the Company including the respondents 4 to 6 herein have any valid, legal or executable claim against the Company. Under the circumstances, these respondents had been indulging in various illegal activities causing disturbance to the Management. On 16.10.2014, these respondents had put up posters in and around the Sathuvachari Integrated Court Complex threatening self immolation. The Police personnel had swung into action and posted a huge police force in front of the Court Complex to avoid any untoward incidents inside the Court Compound. Despite the security accorded, the fourth respondent herein had jumped over the compound of the Court premises and doused himself with kerosene at which point of time, the Police took him along with others who unlawfully assembled outside the Court complex, the same was reported in various press media.
10.The very competent counsel further submits that the respondents 4 to 6 along with their supporters had unlawfully attempted to demolish the compound of the Company's factory premises with the aid of a JCB vehicle. To that effect a complaint was lodged before the third respondent herein who rushed with his Police personnel and dispersed the unlawful mob and also removed the JCB from the premises. Eventhough the unlawful mob picked a quarrel with the Police personnel, besides the respondents 4 to 6 along with his supporters had issued notice and also threatened the Management to take illegal possession of the lands besides they had put up a small tent in the compound to execute their illegal motive. Further, they threatened the security personnel of the Company. The intention of the respondents 4 to 6 was to grab the properties of the Petitioner's Company. Under these circumstances, the petitioner had levelled a Civil Suit along with supplementary application before the District Munsif Court against the respondents 4 to 6 and their agents restraining them not to interfere with their property. The petitioner wanted to construct a compound wall in the petitioner's premises, for which construction materials were unloaded, knowing the same the respondents 4 to 6 and their supporters prevented the proposed construction. Hence, the petitioner lodged a complaint to the third respondent and sought police protection, the same was not provided, hence, the learned counsel entreats the Court to provide police protection. The learned counsel further submits that there is a tense situation in front of the Company premises.
11.The highly competent Additional Government Pleader Mr.M.S.Ramesh appearing for the second and third respondents submit that the incident area under the command of the second and third respondents are both dutiful officers and they are maintaining law and order in the said area. However, the respondents 2 and 3 are maintaining surveillance in the disputed area round the clock. Further, the respondents are attending their duties effectively and conducting enquiry on complaints of the petitioner.
12.From the above discussion, this Court is of the view:
(1)The petitioner has filed a Civil Suit in O.S.No.312 of 2014 along with ancillary application and obtained interim injunction restraining the respondents 4 to 6 and their associates not to interfere with the Petitioner's premises, it clearly shows that there is a civil dispute between the Petitioner and the concerned respondents. If the respondents 4 to 6 are violating a Civil Court injunction order, the Petitioner's remedy could be availed before the said Court.
(2)This Court does not find any lack of service on the side of the second and third respondents for maintaining law and order under the area of their command including the disputed area. Further, the Police personnel have controlled the unlawful activities on two occasions dated 16.10.2014 in front of the Court complex and on 27.10.2014 in front of the Petitioner's premises respectively and timely. As such, this Court appreciate the top most District Police Officer and the third respondent herein / Inspector of Police of unstinted service. The Inspector of Police called at this Court to notify that he was in full control of the situation, which is highly commendable.
(3)If this Court were to order for specific Police protection that would give a wrong signal to the sincere Police Officers that they are called upon under compulsion on duty but this was absolutely not intended. Therefore, mandatory direction was declined.
13.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and arguments advanced by the learned counsels on either side, on perusing the typed set of papers and the views of this Court as mentioned above (1) to (3), the above writ petition is dismissed.
14.In the result, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
18.12.2014 vs Note:Issue order copy on 18.02.2015.
Index :Yes/No Internet:Yes/No To
1.The Industrial Tribunal, City Civil Court Buildings, Chennai-600 104.
2.The Superintendent of Police, Vellore District, Vellore.
3.The Inspector of Police, Virungeepuram Police Station, Virungeepuram, Vellore District.
C.S.KARNAN.J. vs W.P.No.33076 of 2014 and M.P.No.1 of 2014 18.12.2014