SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(Online)(KER) 49501

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
MANJULA CHELLUR, CJ, AMSHAFFIQUE, J
MANJU O S – Appellant
Versus
CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE – Respondent


J U D G M E N T

SHAFFIQUE,J Petitioner is running a grocery store. She has her own registered workers for carrying on loading and unloading work. Complaint of the petitioner is that 4th respondent is unnecessarily interfering with the business conducted by her and demanding that the entire loading and unloading work has to be given to the persons recommended by the 4th respondent.

2. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, would submit that on receipt of a complaint from the petitioner, they have enquired into the matter. 4th respondent is not involved in the said issue whereas the demand is made by the Headload Workers Union in the said area as it is a scheme covered area.

3. The learned Government Pleader further submits that the police have advised the Union members not to W.P.C.No.5638/2014 2 interfere with the loading and unloading work being done in the premises of the petitioner on account of the fact that the petitioner has her own registered workers.

4. Having regard to the aforesaid submission made by the learned Government Pleader, we do not think that any further direction is required to be passed in the above case as the police had already interfered in the matter

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top