Ramachandra Menon,J
Petitioner is a farmer in the Kuttanad area and is stated as associated with Kizhakkechennamangalam Padasekharam committee who owns an extent of 1.5 acres of paddy land, as borne by Ext.P2. It is stated that the cultivation area is being pursued by the Committee on behalf of all the persons concerned who are members, owning different extents of paddy land. conglomerate. The committee is headed by the 3rd respondent as the convener. According to the petitioner, the committee was being convened by the 3rd respondent without giving any intimation to the petitioner and hence much of the rights and interest of the petitioner were being jeo-paradised. However, later, by virtue of the involvement of the 2nd respondent and other officials, the petitioner was invited to the committee meeting held on 27.02.2014 and he has attended to the same.
W.P.(C) No.16440 of 2014 2
2. It is the case of the petitioner that, the opinion expressed from the part of the petitioner was not to the liking of the 3rd respondent and others concerned, who sought to manhandle the petitioner, which was successfully prevented only with the intervention of other members. It is stated that a general body meeting is going to be convened on 29.06.2014 near the residence of the 3rd respondent and that there is every chance for the petitioner to be manhandled by the respondents 3 and 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner has already crossed the age of 70 years and is having several ailments including high blood pressure and that he has become paralysed to some extent, by virtue of which he finds it very difficult even to speak at times. The life of the petitioner is stated as in danger and hence the writ petition.
3. The learned Government Pleader on behalf of the 1st and 2nd respondents submits that, there is absolutely no factual basis with regard to the averments raised in the writ petition and that the petitioner has not approached the police so far. No petition or complaint, if any, preferred before the police has been produced as part of the writ petition. It is also stated that, but W.P.(C) No.16440 of 2014 3 for seeking a vague and blanket relief to grant protection to the life of the petitioner, no relief has been moulded with reference to the general body meeting scheduled to be held on 29.06.2014. It is also stated that, if there is any threat to the law and order situation and if the position is brought to the notice of the police, appropriate arrangements would be made by the police to solve the situation.
In the above circumstances, this Court finds that this is not a fit case to call for interference. Accordingly interference is declined and writ petition is dismissed. We make it clear that, if there is any threat to the law and order situation, the same shall be taken care of by the police.
MANJULA CHELLUR, CHIEF JUSTICE
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE.
sj 27/06