S SASEENDRAN PILLAI Vs. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has come to this Court for issue of directions under Art.226 of the Constitution to respondents 1 and 2 to afford police protection to the petitioner to run a quarry in accordance with law as per the requisite permit/licence issued by the 4th respondent, the District Collector.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, he has secured the required permit/licence to run the quarry. He has complied with all the requisite legal formalities. The 3rd respondent is an influential person of the locality. He makes untenable and unsustainable demands. He insisted that the quarry products must be sold for fixed reduced prices to the local inhabitants. He insisted that vehicles of the local persons alone should be employed for W.P.(C) No. 38684 of 2010 -: 2 :- transportation of the quarry products. He was restoring to wanton, highhanded, culpable and violent acts to prevent peaceful operation of the quarry by the petitioner. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner came to this Court with this petition.

(3.) THE 4th respondent, who had issued the requisite permit to the petitioner to operate the quarry, was arrayed as a party later and was directed to file a statement. In the statement filed by him the District Collector has stated categorically that the operation of the quarry does not endanger ecology and environment.