Kerala High Court
N.Shajahan Aged 33 Years vs Munnar Grama Panchayath on 10 January, 2013
Bench: K.M.Joseph, C.K.Abdul Rehim
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM
THURSDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013/20TH POUSHA 1934
WP(C).No. 25831 of 2012 (D)
---------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
------------------------
1. N.SHAJAHAN AGED 33 YEARS,
S/O. NUT MUHAMMED ABBAS, PROPRIETOR,
SHAJI TRADERS, MARKET ROAD, MUNNAR DAILY MARKET,
MUNNAR PO - PIN - 685 612.
2. ABDUL REHMAN, S/O. K.C.MAKKAR, AGED 45 YEARS,
PROPRIETOR, KCM TRADERS, MARKET ROAD, MUNNAR DAILY
MARKET, MUNNAR PO, PIN - 685 612.
3. S.VELUCHAMY, S/O.SADASIVAM, PROPRIETOR, NSPS TRADERS,
MARKET ROAD, MUNNAR DAILY MARKET, MUNNAR PO,
PIN - 685 612.
4. ABDUL KAREEM, S/O.ISMAIL, RESIDING AT SHYLA MANZIL,
NEAR PWD GUEST HOUSE, MUNNAR PO, PIN - 685 612.
BY ADV. SRI.N.M.VARGHESE
RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS
SECRETARY,PANCHAYAT OFFICE, MUNNAR PO,
IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 612.
2. THE SUB COLLECTOR, DEVIKULAM, DEVIKULAM PO,
IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 613.
3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MUNNAR,
MUNNAR PO, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 612.
Kss ..2/-
..2....
WPC.NO.25831/2012 D
4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUNNAR,
MUNNAR PO, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 612.
5. TATA GLOBAL BEVERAGES LIMITED.,
(ERSTWHILE TATA TEA LIMITED) REPRESENTED BY ITS
CHIEF MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, GH COMPOUND,
MUNNAR PO,IDUKKI DISTRICT - PIN - 685 612.
6. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF HOME, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
7. SANKAR, S/O.SAKARAIA, COCONUT MERCHANT, MARKET GATE,
MUNNAR DAILY MARKET, MUNNAR PO, IDUKKI DISTRICT,
PIN - 685 612.
8. ABDUL BARI, S/O.IBRAHIM, PROVISION BUSINESS,
MARKET GATE, MUNNAR DAILY MARKET, MUNNAR PO,
IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 612.
9. ANPARASAN,S/O.MANI, GARLIC BUSINESS, MARKET GATE,
MUNNAR DAILY MARKET, MUNNAR PO, IDUKKI DISTRICT,
PIN - 685 612.
10. RAJ, S/O.SHANMUGHAIAH, FRUIT MERCHANT, MARKET GATE,
MUNNAR DAILY MARKET, MUNNAR PO,
IDUKKI DISTRICT - PIN - 685 612.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.JOICE GEORGE,SC, MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT
R4 BY STATE ATTORNEY SRI.P.VIJAYARAGHAVAN
R2 TO R4 & R6 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.R.SYAMKUMAR
R5 BY ADVS. SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOSE
SRI.MATHEWS K.UTHUPPACHAN
SRI.BINU MATHEW
SRI.TERRY V.JAMES
SRI.TOM THOMAS (KAKKUZHIYIL)
R7 TO 10 BY ADVS. SRI.M.RAMASWAMY PILLAI
SRI.P.M.JOSEPH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 10-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
Kss
WPC.NO.25831/2012 D
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
P1: COPY OF SALE DEED NO.391/2011 DTD. 11/02/2011 OF SRO,DEVIKULAM.
P2: COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION OF BUSINESS IN THE NAME
OF THE 2ND PETITIONER WITH THE TAX AUTHORITY.
P2(A): COPY OF LICENSE FEE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
PANCHAYATH TO THE BUSINESS OF THE 2ND PETITIONER.
P3: COPY OF SALE DEED NO.100 DTD. 1/1/1983 EXECUTED IN FAVOUR
OF THE 3RD PETITIONER.
P3(A): COPY OF AGREEMENT IN FAVOUR OF THE 4TH PETITIONERS
DTD. 01/07/2002 EXECUTED IN THE NAME OF HIS WIFE.
P3(B): COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE BUSINESS OF TO THE 4TH
PETITIONER BY THE GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY DTD. 26/07/2007.
P4: PHOTOGRAPHS NO.5 OF THE VISUAL SITUATION IN THE MARKET ON
ACCOUNT OF THE ENCROCHMENT OF PARTY RESPONDENTS 7 TO 10.
P5: COPY OF LAWYER NOTICE DTD. 1/10/2012 SENT TO RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3.
P5(A): COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT DUE CARD SIGNED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT ON 8/10/2012 CONCERNING RECEIPT OF EXT.P5.
P5(B): COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT DUE CARD SIGNED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT ON 8/10/2012 CONCERNING RECEIPT OF EXT.P5.
P5(C): COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT DUE CARD SIGNED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT ON 8/10/2012 CONCERNING RECEIPT OF EXT.P5.
P6: COPY OF COMPLAINT DTD. 23/10/2012 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS
AND OTHERS BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
P7: COPY OF COMPLAINT DTD. 25/10/2012 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD
RESPONDENT SEEKING PROTECTION TO LIFE AND PROPERTY.
P8: COPY OF NEWS ITEM PUBLISHED IN THE MATHRUBHOOMI DAILY
DTD. 26/10/2012.
P9: PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE SITUATION AFTER THE INTERIM
ORDER DTD. 28/11/2012 AS ON 6/12/2012.
Kss ..2/-
..2....
WPC.NO.25831/2012 D
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:
R7(A): COPY OF THE RECEIPTS STALL RENT OF MUNNAR TOWN MARKET.
R7(B): COPY OF PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE LOCATION.
R7(C): COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 2/11/2012 ISSUED TO THE DEPUTY
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MUNNAR.
R7(D): COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION BEFORE THE HUMAN COMMISSION
DTD. 2/11/2012.
R7(D): (I.A.NO.16544/2012) - PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THAT THERE IS NO
PROBLEM OF MOVING AND THERE IS ENOUGH
PATHWAY TO REACH THE SHOPS AND CONDUCT
THE SHOPPING.
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
Kss
K.M. JOSEPH & C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ.
-------------------------------------------------
W.P (c) No. 25831 OF 2012
-------------------------------------------------
DATED THIS THE 10th DAY OF JANUARY, 2013
J U D G M E N T
Joseph, J:
Petitioners have approached this court seeking the following reliefs:
"(i) Call for the entire records from the respondents pertaining to the issues raised in the writ petition;
(ii) issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 4 to take appropriate action against the party respondents and similarly placed others to stop the illegal construction, encroachment, threat to life and public tranquility from the part of the respondents pursuant to the complaints of the petitioners;
(iii) issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 3 and 4 to afford adequate protection to the life, liberty and property of the petitioners in the light of the threat complained of and unattended, from the part of the party respondents."
2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioners is as follows:
"Petitioners apprehend threat to life and livelihood from the part of the respondents 7 to
10. The petitioners are permanent shop owners in Munnar daily market and the party respondents W.P.(C) No.25831/2012 -2- are the hawkers conducting business unauthorisedly. The party respondents are causing all sorts of troubles to the petitioners and the public. They are even making unauthorised construction covering the shop buildings of the petitioners and causing threat to public safety. The threat to life and livelihood being raised by the party respondents are not being attended by the official respondents on political influence. Hence the petitioner before us."
3. Reply is filed. We have heard learned counsel for the party respondents. We have already passed an interim order. It reads as follows:
"There will be an interim order directing the 2nd respondent to see that the lives of the petitioners are protected as against any threat from respondents 7 to 10. The 2nd respondent will also see that respondents 7 to 10 do not obstruct the ingress and egress to the business place of the petitioners. But we make it crystal clear that under the guise of this Order, respondents 7 to 10 shall not be evicted and the conduct of their business shall not be otherwise interfered with."
4. No doubt learned counsel for the petitioner would point out even after passing of the interim order there were obstructions from respondents 7 to 10. He would W.P.(C) No.25831/2012 -3- submit that actually the 1st respondent and the 5th respondent company can help to ameliorate the condition. Learned counsel for the 1st respondent submits that actually the property where the market is located is owned by the 5th respondent.
5. After hearing the parties, we dispose of the writ petition in terms of the interim order and by directing that the protection as ordered will be granted as and when required. We leave it open to the petitioner to approach respondents 1 and 5 with appropriate petition seeking redress as available under law.
Sd/-
K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE.
Sd/-
C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.
AMG True copy P.A to Judge