STERLING HOLIDAY RESORTS LTD. & SHYJU T.V. v STATE OF KERALA & ORS

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN** **THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 4TH CHAITHRA, 1943** **W.P.(C) No.6335 OF 2021(N)** ## **PETITIONERS:** **1 STERLING HOLIDAY RESORTS LTD., CHINNAKANAL POST, IDUKKI DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, SHRI. SHYJU T.V. 2 SHYJU T.V., GENERAL MANAGER, STERLING MUNNAR, CHINNAKANAL POST, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 618. BY ADVS. SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.D.PREM KAMATH SRI.TOM THOMAS (KAKKUZHIYIL) SHRI.ABEL TOM BENNY SHRI.JYOTHISH KRISHNA SHRI.AHAMMAD SACHIN K. SHRI.KURIAN OOMMEN THERAKATH** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.** - **2 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 612.** - **3 STATION HOUSE OFFICER (CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE), SANTHANPARA POLICE STATION, SANTHANPARA, IDUKKI-685 619.** - **4 THE DEPUTY LABOUR OFFICER, NEDUNKANDAM, IDUKKI-685 553.** -2- W.P.(C) No.6335 OF 2021(N) **5 IDUKKI DISTRICT HOTELS, RESORTS AND SHOP WORKERS UNION, A.I.T.U.C. REGD. NO.290/84, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685612 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.** **SRI.SUNIL NATH N.B., GOVERNMENT PLEADER** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P.(C) No.6335 OF 2021(N) -3- ## **JUDGMENT** The 1[st] petitioner, which is a company incorporated under the Companies Act having a resort situated at Chinnakanal near Munnar in Idukki District, and the 2[nd] petitioner, who is the General Manager of that resort, have filed this writ petition under Article 266 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 2 and 3 to afford adequate and effective protection for smooth functioning of the resort 'Sterling Munnar' at Chinnakanal and for free ingress and egress of employees, guests, vehicles, goods, contract workers to and from the resort premises and for free movement of employees, vehicles, guests, etc. The petitioners have also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 2 and 3 to ensure that law and order is strictly maintained at the entrance and inside the petitioners' resort 'Sterling Munnar' and also to ensure that no dharna, march or demonstrations are taken out by or under the leadership of the 5[th] respondent, as threatened by them, within a radius of 100 metres from the entrance of the resort. In the writ petition, it is alleged that, in connection with deputation of one employee who was working as bellboy to the resort of the petitioner Company at W.P.(C) No.6335 OF 2021(N) -4- Ootty, vide Ext.P1 order dated 05.02.2021, the 5[th] respondent Workers' Union issued Ext.P2 notice dated 27.02.2021 for staging dharna in front of the resort. The petitioners submitted Ext.P3 complaint dated 09.03.2021 before the 3[rd] respondent Station House Officer, seeking police protection and thereafter, moved this writ petition before this Court, seeking the aforesaid reliefs. 2. On 10.03.2021, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Government Pleader took notice on admission for respondents 1 to 4. Urgent notice on admission by special messenger was ordered to the 5[th] respondent, returnable by 12.03.2021. The learned Government Pleader was directed to get instructions. 3. On 12.03.2021, when this writ petition was taken up for ## consideration, this Court passed the following order; “Having considered the averments in the writ petition and also the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and also the learned Government Pleader, there will be an interim order directing the 3[rd] respondent Station House Officer to take necessary steps to ensure that there is no threat to law and order in the locality, in connection with any protest/agitation by the 5[th] respondent Workers Union or its members. Any such protest/agitation shall be without W.P.(C) No.6335 OF 2021(N) **==> picture [19 x 7] intentionally omitted <==** causing any obstruction whatsoever to free ingress and egress to the petitioners establishment and without affecting the smooth functioning of that establishment.” 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 4. Despite service of notice, none appears for the 5[th] respondent. 5. The Kerala Police Act, 2011 is enacted to consolidate and amend the law relating to the establishment, regulation, powers and duties of the Police Force in the State of Kerala and for matters connected therewith and incidental thereto. Chapter II of the Act deals with duties and functions of Police. Section 3 of the Act deals with general duties of Police. As per Section 3, the Police, as a service functioning category among the people as part of the administrative system shall, subject to the Constitution of India and the laws enacted thereunder, strive in accordance with the law, to ensure that all persons enjoy the freedoms and rights available under the law by ensuring peace and order, integrity of the nation, security of the State and protection of human rights. Section 4 of the Act deals with functions of Police. As per Section 4, the Police Officers shall, subject to the provisions of the Act, perform the functions enumerated in clauses (a) to (s) of Section ## W.P.(C) No.6335 OF 2021(N) -6- 4. As per clause (a), the Police Officers shall enforce the law impartially; and as per clause (b), the Police Officers shall protect the life, liberty, property, human rights and dignity of all persons in accordance with the law. 6. Lord Denning in 'The Due Process of law' [First Indian Reprint 1993, Page 102] has described the role of the Police thus; "In safeguarding our freedoms, the police play vital role. Society for its defence needs a well-led, well-trained and well-disciplined force or police whom it can trust, and enough of them to be able to prevent crime before it happens, or if it does happen, to detect it and bring the accused to justice. The police, of course, must act properly. They must obey the rules of right conduct. They must not extort confessions by threats or promises. They must not search a man's house without authority. They must not use more force than the occasion warrants." 7. In **Manohar Lal Sharma v. Principal Secretary** **[(2014) 2 SCC 532]** the Apex Court held that, one of the responsibilities of the police is protection of life, liberty and property of citizens. The investigation of offences is one of the important duties the police has to perform. The aim of investigation is ultimately to search for truth and bring the W.P.(C) No.6335 OF 2021(N) -7- offender to the book. The Apex Court reiterated the said principle in **Ankush Maruti Shinde v. State of Maharashtra [(2019) 15 SCC 470]** . 8. In **Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd. Vs. Gujarat Steel Tubes Mazdoor Sabha [(1980) 2 SCC 593]** the Apex Court held that, the right to unionise, the right to strike as part of collective bargaining and subject to the legality and humanity of the situation, the right of the weaker group viz. labour, to pressure the stronger party viz. capital, to negotiate and render justice, are processes recognised by industrial jurisprudence and supported by Social Justice. While society itself, in its basic needs of existence, may not be held to ransom in the name of the right to bargain and strikers must obey civilised norms in the battle and not be vulgar or violent hoodlums industry, represented by intransigent Managements, may well be made to reel into reason by the strike weapon and cannot then sequeal or wail and complain of loss of profits or other ill-effects but must negotiate or get a reference made. The broad basis is that workers are weaker although they are the producers and their struggle to better their lot has the sanction of the rule of law. Unions and strikers are no more W.P.(C) No.6335 OF 2021(N) -8- conspiracies than professions and political parties, are, and being far weaker, need succour. Part IV of the Constitution, read with Article 19, sows the seed of this burgeoning jurisprudence. The Gandhian quote at the beginning of the judgment [Para.5 @ Page 603 SCC] sets the tone of economic equity in industry. Of course, adventurist, extremist, extraneously inspired and puerile strike, absurdly insane persistence and violent or scorched earth policies boomerang and are anathema for the law. Within these parameters the right to strike is integral to collective bargaining. 9. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that, based on the interim order of this Court dated 12.03.2021, the 3[rd] respondent Station House Officer has rendered necessary police protection. 10. The learned Government Pleader would submit that, at present there is no law and order issues in the locality. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions; i) The 3[rd] respondent Station House Officer shall take necessary steps to ensure that there is no threat to law and W.P.(C) No.6335 OF 2021(N) -9- order in the locality, in connection with any protest/agitation by the members of the 5[th] respondent Workers' Union in front of the petitioner's resort in connection with Ext.P1 order. ii) In case there is any threat to the life of the petitioners or threat to law and order in the locality, at the instance of the 5[th] respondent Workers' Union, the petitioners shall move the 3[rd] respondent Station House Officer, with a proper request for police protection. iii) In case any such request for Police protection is made by the petitioners, the 3[rd] respondent shall take necessary action on that request, without any delay, taking note of the statutory provisions referred to hereinbefore and also the law laid down in the decisions referred to supra. iv) It is made clear that this judgment will not stand in the way of the members of the 5[th] respondent Workers' Union staging any protest/agitation in a democratic manner, without causing any obstruction whatsoever, to the smooth functioning of the petitioners resort. Sd/- **ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE** bpr W.P.(C) No.6335 OF 2021(N) -10- ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF DEPUTATION DATED 05.02.2021. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 27.02.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 09.03.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS.** **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL**