MATHEWS vs THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

The petitioners are before this Court with the

following prayers:

"i) To issue a writ of mandamus or other

appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1st

respondent to provide adequate and sufficient police

protection to the life and properties of the petitioners and

to their workers from the 2nd respondent and his men for

the cultivation of pineapple saplings in 1st petitioner''s 6

acres land in survey number 325/2, 325/3 and 325/5-1 of

Mezhuvelil village in Pathanamthitta district.

ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate

writ, order of direction directing the 1st respondent to

consider Ext.P2 complaint and to take a lawful action

thereon against the 2nd respondent and his men.

And

iii) Grant such other reliefs that are found necessary

by this Hon''ble Court in the facts and circumstances of the

case."

A counter affidavit has been filed by the second

respondent pointing out that the petitioners are using

objectionable pesticides, that too without any regard to

the close proximity to St.John''s MSC LP School at a

distance of about 10m. It is also pointed out that, it is the

duty of the officers of the Agricultural Department to

ensure that no adverse activity is being pursued by the

farmers like the petitioners, detrimental to the health of

the nearby inhabitants.

The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits

that the petitioners are ready to comply with any

condition to be imposed by the additional 3rd respondent

who has been impleaded as per order dated 20.11.2017

in I.A.No.17684/2017. Reference is also made to Ext.P3

communication bearing No.E-1/2015 dated 18.8.2017

issued by the Additional 3rd respondent/Agricultural

officer, adding that the petitioners will definitely comply

with all the requirements and satisfy the conditions

stipulated for conducting the agricultural operation.

It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the

party respondents, that the spraying of pesticides, if

permitted during the school hours, will quite adversely

affect the health of the students and staff/teachers. The

learned counsel for the petitioners points out that no

spraying of any pesticide is done or intended to be done;

but for applying it directly on the bud, by a manual

process. It is also stated that, the petitioners are ready to

use only such chemicals/pesticides as prescribed by the

Kerala Agricultural University and that the usage of such

pesticides shall be in confirmity with the prescribed

dose.

The learned Government Pleader points out that,

in so far as the petitioners confine the activity by using

the permissible pesticides as prescribed by the Kerala

Agricultural University and in the required dose, the

petitioners can be permitted to have the relief.

The learned counsel for the party respondents

submits that, they have never taken the law into their

hands, but for raising their objection as to the undesirable

activities in using the pesticides as mentioned above. This

Court, under a similar circumstance, has passed a verdict

on 20.10.2017 in W.P(C)No.30700/2017, whereby the

writ petition was disposed of directing the Agricultural

Officer to inspect the farm of the petitioners at least once

in a month and to submit inspection reports to the Joint

Director of Agriculture, Pathanamthitta to ensure that

there is no deviation from the instructions given by the

Agricultural Officer and on finding any deviation, he will

be at liberty to issue necessary instructions to stop

further farming activities. It was accordingly, that the

writ petition was disposed of, observing that in the event

of any obstruction to the farming operations, subject to

the above requirements, the petitioners could report the

matter to the Police who stand directed to grant adequate

Police protection.

In the above circumstance, this Court finds it

appropriate to make it clear that the petitioners shall use

only pesticides prescribed by the Kerala Agricultural

University, in the prescribed dose and that the same shall

not be by spraying during the school hours ie; between 10

a.m to 4 p.m. The ''undertaking'' given by the learned

counsel for the petitioners in this regard is recorded.

If at all there is any forcible obstruction from the

part of the party respondents or anybody under them, it

shall be reported to the Police; upon which adequate and

effective protection shall be given to the petitioners to

pursue the agricultural operations. The writ petition is

disposed of.