BALACHANDRAN D. Vs. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has approached this court complaining of inaction on the part of respondents 1 and 2 in giving protection to the life and property from respondents 7 to 12 and their henchmen. Protection is sought for the smooth conduct of his restaurant viz. Hotel River Plaza.

(2.) BRIEFLY put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: The petitioner after completing his unblemished service in Cochin Shipyard as an Engineer, started a quality family restaurant namely Hotel River Plaza. He is conducting his business on a land measuring 17.8 cents of land. It aroused the envy of the people. Respondents 7 to 12 are the residents of the area. It is submitted that respondents 7 to 12 are creating public opinion that petitioner is not having the habit of giving wages of the workers. Petitioner is uncompromising in the matter of quality of food supplied in the restaurant. Respondent No.8 is conducting a 'Thattukada' in front of petitioners shop. He cannot dream of supply of quality food like the food petitioner has been supplying. In short there is obstruction. Of course, there is mention about certain incidents involving the workers of the petitioner.

(3.) LEARNED Government Pleader would submit that it was found that price list was not displayed. One of the workers, who was demanded arrears of wages was manhandled and a case is charge sheeted. Yet another worker with the similar complaint was also assaulted by the petitioner and his son.