1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the vires of Ext.P18, a public notice issued by the 2nd respondent in exercise of the powers under Section 16E of the Tea Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, for short) on the ground that the notice was not preceded by a formal order of the competent authority under the said provision and that the proceedings were issued without complying with the principles of Natural Justice.

2. The petitioner is a Public Limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. The petitioner owns two tea estates by name Peermede and Lone Tree Estates at Elappara, Idukki District. The petitioner is engaged in the cultivation and manufacture of tea. At the two estates, the petitioner employs about 1300 workers, 80 staff, and other managerial personnel. The workmen of the petitioner are residing within the estates, in separate living quarters allotted to them. The petitioner has been in management of the tea estates since 1938.

3. According to the petitioner, of late, the tea industry in general and within the State of Kerala in particular, has been facing acute financial crisis on account of various reasons including a drastic fall in the price of tea globally, and a steep increase in the cost of production. Due to a host of other problems, the tea industry is facing an unprecedented situation that could even lead to the liquidation of all the tea plantations and factories in the country. In the case of the petitioner, the situation took a turn for the worse during the year 2000 due to the non-co-operation of the workers in the two estates. They started resorting to various forms of agitations like reporting late for work and leaving early from the work spot. The management also detected several instances of theft. The managerial action to curb the illegal activities resulted in physical threats and even threat to the lives of the managers, forcing them to abandon the work spot. Consequently, the control of the Management over the estates diminished. The workers freely indulged in collection of the tea leaves, selling them to unauthorized buyers and collecting the money. In other words, the workers excluded the petitioner and its managers from the factory and plantations and took complete control of the estates. There are even allegations of felling of valuable timber trees and of encroachments. The electric connection to the plantations were dismantled for non-payment of electricity dues. The workers took a militant attitude and completely paralyzed the administration of the two tea estates and prevented even the access of the petitioner to those estates.

4. The resultant situation forced the petitioner to stop all manufacturing activities. The factories and the machinery therein were damaged due to misuse and neglect. The managerial personnel of the petitioner were driven out and the workers indulged in theft of tea leaves as well as timber trees, besides causing damage to machinery. The petitioner therefore, approached this Court by filing O.P.No.2430/2001, which resulted in the passing of Ext.P1(a) to P1(f) interim orders and finally, Ext.P1(g) judgment. A reading of the above orders and the judgment of this Court shows that the right of the petitioner to resume possession and management of the plantations and its factories was recognized by this Court and that directions were issued to the Government as well as the Police to ensure that the petitioner's right of management was protected. However, it is not in dispute that the petitioner and its managerial staff were effectively prevented from resuming control of the estates or its management and that the stalemate continues to this date. The petitioner was even permitted by this Court to post its own security men at the exit and entry gates with necessary directions to the Police to give protection to them. However, in spite of the above, the petitioner could not resume management of the plantations or