Kerala High Court · 2012

W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:4:-and other tobacco products are being carried out in blatant violation ofthe provisions therein, thereby posing a threat to the rule of law. It is alsopointed out that the unbridled sale of cigarette and other tobacco productsare being carried out in closer proximity to the educational institutions,in spite of the enactment of Prohibition on Sale of Cigarettes and OtherTobacco Products around Education Institutions Rules, 2004. Hence,according to the petitioner association, no other efficacious remedy isopen to them, but to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court toensure the implementation of COTPA and its allied Rules, therebyprotecting the fundamental right of the citizens to live in a healthyenvironment with dignity as enshrined under Article 21 of theConstitution of India.6.The respondents entered appearance. 7. Reports were called for from the third respondent as well asfrom the Director of Public Instructions, Thiruvananthapuram.8. As authorised by the third respondent, the Assistant InspectorGeneral of Police (Public Grievance), Police Head Quarters,Thiruvananthapuram, filed report dated 17/11/2011 on behalf of State W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:5:-Police Chief. The learned Government Pleader for the State submitted areport dated 03/1/2012 on behalf of the Director of Public Instructions. 9.The report submitted on behalf of the 3rd respondent, can besummed up as under:The police department has been taking stringent action in rightearnest in the matter against those who violate the provisions of COTPAand the Rules thereunder. There was no dereliction of duty on the part ofthe police in enforcing the ban on smoking in public places. Consequentto the judgment of this Court in Ramakrishna v. State of Kerala (1999(2) KLT 725), directions were issued to the police officers to conductraid and to take other effective measures to enforce the directions in thejudgment and to book the violators. After the decision of this Court inNebu John v. Babu (2000 (1) KLT 238), the police have been more strictin the matter of prosecuting those who smoke in public places. Severalcases relating to violation of ban on smoking have been conducted andproceeded against by the police. Emphasis has been given by the policein the matter of enforcement of COTPA and all District PoliceChiefs have been directed to take initiative to form School Protection W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:6:-Groups for every school as far as possible. The school protection groupof each school is to be chaired by either the Head of the Institution or thePresident of the Parent-Teacher Association. The local station houseofficer is to be the convenor of such group, the duty of which shall be tocollect and pass on information regarding selling/supply/ use of tobaccoproducts in the school area. 10. In the report submitted on behalf of the Director of PublicInstructions, it is stated that all heads of the schools in the State and othereducational institutions have been directed to issue directions thatsmoking in the respective institutions must be punishable by law and theauthorities were also directed to display “smoking prohibited” boards inthe schools and other premises. Thus, according to them smokingprohibited boards have been displayed in all schools and othereducational institutions. Apart from this, it is stated that seminars, campsand counseling are periodically conducted in the schools utilising theservice of social workers, counsellors; so stated in the report. Hazards ofsmoking of tobacco products are included in the school curriculum sothat awareness can be created in their minds against smoking. Steps W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:7:-against smoking in the school premises and other educational institutionsare periodically monitored in the meeting of the Headmasters concernedconvened by Assistant Education Officers/District Educational Officersor other authorities. Heads of schools, with the support of Parent-Teachers Association are effectively taking steps to prevent sale oftobacco products near school premises by making complaint to the policeand other authorities. So, according to the report, effective steps in tunewith the direction of the State Government to prevent sale andconsumption of tobacco products in all the schools and in theneighbourhood, have been taken.11. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learnedCentral Government Standing Counsel and also learned GovernmentPleader for the State. The reports were also perused. 12. While the arguments advanced by the learned GovernmentPleader for the State was confined to the measures said to have beentaken by the Government as well as the police, as per the statutoryrequirements and the judicial decisions, the learned counsel for the CentralGovernment opposed the petition mainly on the following grounds: W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:8:-(a) The jurisdiction of this Court cannot be invoked for theimplementation of the provisions of a statute.(b) No specific instance of violation has been pointed out by thepetitioner to substantiate the alleged dereliction of duty.13. Having heard the rival submissions at the Bar, we find that thefollowing questions arise for consideration in this writ petition.(a) Whether the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of theConstitution of India be invoked for the implementation of the provisionsof COTPA and its allied Rules, as well as the Cinematograph Act, 1952 ?(d)What effective directions can be given in the matter toremedy the situation pointed out by the petitioner ?14. It was brought to our notice that the 43rd World HealthAssembly under the World Health Organisation (WHO) in its 14thPlenary Meeting held on 17/05/1990, has urged the Member States toconsider in their tobacco control strategy plans, for legislation and othereffective measures for protecting their citizen with special attention torisk groups such as pregnant women and children from involuntaryexposure to tobacco smoke, and to discourage the use of tobacco and W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:9:-impose progressive restrictions by taking concerted action to eventuallyeliminate all direct and indirect advertising, promotion and sponsorshipconcerning tobacco. The Central Government enacted the COTPA andthe Prohibition of Smoking in Public Places Rules, 2008 drawinginspiration from the said resolution and other resolutions of the WHO. 15.During the course of the argument, we were taken to Rules 4,5, 6 and 7 of COTPA, the reproduction of which would be relevant forour discussion. The relevant sections run as follows: S.4. Prohibition of smoking in a public place.- No person shall smokein any public place:Provided that in a hotel having thirty rooms or a restauranthaving seating capacity of thirty persons or more and in the airports, aseparate provision for smoking area or space may be made.S.5. Prohibition of advertisement of cigarettes and other tobaccoproducts.- (1) No person engaged in, or purported to be engaged in theproduction, supply or distribution of cigarettes or any other tobaccoproducts shall advertise and no person having control over a mediumshall cause to be advertised cigarettes or any other tobacco productsthrough that medium and no person shall take part in any advertisementwhich directly or indirectly suggests or promotes the use of consumptionof cigarettes or any other tobacco products.(2) No person, for any direct or indirect pecuniary benefit, shall-(a) display, cause to display, or permit or authorise to displayany advertisement of cigarettes or any other tobacco product; or, W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:10:-(b) sell or cause to sell, or permit or authorise to sell a film orvideo tape containing advertisement of cigarettes or any other tobaccoproduct; or,(c) distribute, cause to distribute, or permit or authorise todistribute to the public any leaflet, hand-bill or document which is orwhich contains an advertisement of cigarettes or any other tobaccoproduct; or(d) erect, exhibit, fix or retain upon or over any land, building,wall, hoarding, frame, post or structure or upon or in any vehicle or shalldisplay in any manner whatsoever in any place any advertisement ofcigarettes or any other tobacco product:Provided that this sub-section shall not apply in relation to-(a) an advertisement of cigarettes or any other tobacco productin or on a package containing cigarettes or any other tobacco product;(b) an advertisement of cigarettes or any other tobacco productwhich is displayed at the entrance or inside a warehouse or a shop wherecigarettes and any other tobacco products are offered for distribution orsale.(3) No person, shall, under a contract or otherwise promote oragree to promote the use or consumption of -(a) cigarettes or any other tobacco product; or(b) any trade mark or brand name of cigarettes or any othertobacco product in exchange for a sponsorship, gift, prize or scholarshipgiven or agreed to be given by another person. 6. Prohibition on sale of cigarette or other tobacco products toa person below the age of eighteen years and in particular area.- Noperson shall sell, offer for sale, or permit sale of, cigarette or any othertobacco product- W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:11:-(a) to any person who is under eighteen years of age, and(b) in an area within a radius of one hundred yards of anyeducational institution.7. Restrictions on trade and commerce in, and production,supply and distribution of cigarettes and other tobacco products.-(1)No person shall, directly or indirectly, produce, supply or distributecigarettes or any other tobacco products unless every package ofcigarettes or any other tobacco products, produced, supplied ordistributed by him bears thereon, or on its label, the specified warningincluding a pictorial depiction of skull and cross bones and such otherwarning as may be prescribed.(2) No person shall carry on trade or commerce in cigarettes orany other tobacco products unless every package of cigarettes or anyother tobacco products sold, supplied or distributed by him bearsthereon, or on its label, the specified warning.(3) No person shall import cigarettes or any other tobaccoproducts for distribution or supply for a valuable consideration or forsale in India unless every package of cigarettes or any other tobaccoproducts so imported by him bears thereon, or on its label, the specifiedwarning.(4) The specified warning shall appear on not less than one of thelargest panels of the package in which cigarettes or any other tobaccoproducts have been packed for distribution, sale or supply for a valuableconsideration.(5) No person shall, directly or indirectly, produce, supply ordistribute cigarettes or any other tobacco products unless every packageof cigarettes or any other tobacco products produced, supplied ordistributed by him indicates thereon, or on its label, the nicotine and tar W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:12:-contents on each cigarette or as the case may be on other tobaccoproducts along with the maximum permissible limits thereof:Provided that the nicotine and tar contents shall not exceed themaximum permissible quantity thereof as may be prescribed by rulesmade under this Act.16. The Central Government by virtue of the powers conferredunder Section 31 of the COTPA, has enacted COTPA Rules, 2004. Rules3, 4 and 5 of the said Rules are also worth quoting in this context. Theyread as follows: “3. Prohibition of smoking in a public place.- (1) The owner orthe manager or in charge of the affairs of a public place shall cause tobe displayed prominently a board, of a minimum size of sixty centimetreby thirty centimetre in the Indian language(s) as applicable, at least oneat the entrance of the public place and one at conspicuous place(s)inside, containing the warning “No Smoking Area- Smoking Here is anOffence”.(2) The owner or the manager or in charge of the affairs of ahotel having thirty rooms or restaurant having seating capacity of thirtypersons or more and the manager of the airport shall ensure that,-(i) the smoking and non-smoking areas as physically segregated;(ii) the smoking area shall be located in such manner that thepublic is not required to pass through it in order to reach the non-smoking area; and (iii) each area shall contain boards indicating thereon“Smoking Area/Non-Smoking Area”. W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:13:-4. Prohibition of advertisement of cigarette and other tobaccoproducts.- (1) The size of the board used for advertisement forcigarettes and any other tobacco products displayed at the entrance orinside a warehouse or a shop where cigarettes and any other suchtobacco products are offered for distribution of sale shall not exceedninety centimetre by sixty centimetre and number of such boards shallnot exceed two.(2) Each such board shall contain in the Indian language asapplicable, one of the following warnings occupying twenty-five percent, of top area or the board, namely:-(i) Tobacco Causes Cancer, or(ii) Tobacco Kills(3) The board referred to in sub-rule (2) shall contain only the brandname or picture of the tobacco product and no other promotionalmessage and picture.”5. Prohibition of sale to minors.- (1) The owner or the manager or theincharge of the affairs of a place where cigarettes and other tobaccoproducts are sold shall display a board of minimum size of sixtycentimetre by thirty centimetre at conspicuous place(s) containing thewarning “Sale of tobacco products to a person under the age ofeighteen years is a punishable offence”, in Indian language(s) asapplicable.(2) The onus of proof that the buyer of the tobacco product isnot a minor lies with the seller of the tobacco products. The seller, incase of doubt, may request tobacco purchaser to provide appropriateevidence of having reached eighteen years of age. W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:14:-17. In addition to that, the Prohibition on Sale of Cigarettes andOther Tobacco Products Around Educational Institutions Rules, 2004 wasalso enacted by the Central Government for prohibiting the sale ofcigarettes and other tobacco products around the educational institutions.Rule 3 of the said Rules reads as follows:-“3. Prohibition on sale of cigarettes and other tobaccoproducts around educational institutions.- (1) Display of board.-The owner or manager or any person in-charge of affairs of theeducational institution shall display and exhibit a board at aconspicuous place(s) outside the premises, prominently stating thatthe sale of cigarettes and other tobacco products in an area within aradius of one hundred yards of the educational institution is strictlyprohibited and that it is an offence punishable with the fine whichmay extend to two hundred rupees.(2) Measurement of distance.- Distance of one hundredyards shall be measured radially starting from the outer limit ofboundary wall, fence or as the case may be, of the educationalinstitution.”18. Our attention was drawn also to Section 5A and 5B of theCinematograph Act, 1952, which read as follows:“5A. Certification of films.- [(1) If, after examining a film orhaving it examined in the prescribed manner, the Board considersthat- W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:15:-(a)the film is suitable for unrestricted public exhibition, or, asthe case may be, for unrestricted public exhibition with anendorsement of the nature mentioned in the proviso to clause(i) of sub-section (1) of section 4, it shall grant to the personapplying for a certificate in respect of a film a “U”certificate or, as the case may be, a “UA” certificate; or(b) the film is not suitable for unrestricted public exhibition, butis suitable for public exhibition restricted to adults or, as thecase may be, is suitable for public exhibition restricted tomembers of any profession or any class of persons, it shallgrant to the person applying for a certificate in respect of thefilm an “A” certificate or, as the case may be, a “S”certificate,and cause the film to be so marked in the prescribed manner.Provided that the applicant for the certificate, anydistributor or exhibitor or any other person to whom the rights in thefilm have passed shall not be liable for punishment under any lawrelating to obscenity in respect of any matter contained in the film forwhich certificate has been granted under clause (a) or clause (b).](2) A certificate granted or an order refusing to grant acertificate in respect of any film shall be published in the Gazette ofIndia.(3) Subject to the other provisions contained in this Act, acertificate granted by the Board under this section shall be validthroughout India for a period of ten years.]5B.Principles for guidance in certifying films.- (1) A film shall notbe certified for public exhibition if, in the opinion of the authoritycompetent to grant the certificate, the film or any part of it is against W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:16:-the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India the security ofthe State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decencyor morality, or involves defamation or contempt of court or is likely toincite the commission of any offence.(2) Subject to the provisions contained in sub-section (1), theCentral Government may issue such directions as it may think fitsetting out the principles which shall guide the authority competent togrant certificates under this Act in sanctioning films for publicexhibition.”19. In exercise of powers conferred under Sub Section (2) ofSection 5B of Cinematograph Act, 1952, the Central Government havealso issued guidelines to the 4th respondent to ensure that certainconditions are fulfilled for certification of films. One among thoseconditions is to see that “scenes tending to encourage, justify orglamorise consumption of tobacco or smoking are not shown”.20. It was argued that the motion pictures are able to steer upemotions more deeply than any other form of art among children andadolescents, since their immaturity makes them more susceptible to whatis being depicted therein, than mature men and women. Therefore, it wasprayed that indirect advertisements through films and other visual mediasresorted to by the cigarette and other tobacco companies are to be W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:17:-curtailed and appropriate directions have to be issued to the 4threspondent in this regard.21. Films and other visual media are forms of expressions thefreedom of which is guaranteed by Article 19(i)(a) of the Constitution ofIndia. However, the same is subject to reasonable restrictions that can beimposed by the State by enacting laws in the interest of the sovereigntyand integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relationship withforeign States, public order, decency or morality or in relation tocontempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence [see A.19(2)].Previously, the trend of judicial opinion was that commercialadvertisements does not fall within the freedom of speech andexpression, as the advertisement is a part of business, the object of whichis furthering business. But, later on the perception about theadvertisement has changed and it has been held that commercial speech isa part of the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article19(1)(a). Therefore, a commercial speech can also be subjected toreasonable restrictions. (See Tata Press Ltd. v Mahangar TelephoneNigam Ltd. (AIR 1995 SC 2438). W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:18:-22. Apart from being subjected to reasonable restrictionsenumerated in Article 19(2), the freedom of speech and expression,guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) is also circumscribed by the right to lifeguaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. We note with distressthat the use of tobacco and allied products is spreading like cancer amongthe children and adolescents below the poverty line to which the majorityof the population belongs. As rightly pointed out by the learned counselfor the petitioner, the smokers dig not only their own grave prematurely,but also pose a serious threat to the life of innocent non-smokers who getthemselves exposed to environmental tobacco smoke thereby violatingtheir right to life. 23. In Munn v. Illinois, Field, J. (94 U.S.113) spoke of the rightto life in the following words:“By the term 'life' as here used something more is meantthan mere animal existence. The inhibition against itsdeprivation extends to all those limbs and faculties by whichlife is enjoyed. The provision equally prohibits the mutilationof the body by the amputation of an arm or leg, or the puttingcut of an eye, or the destruction of any other organ of the bodythrough which the soul communicates with the outer world.” W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:19:-24. This statement which has been repeatedly quoted withapproval by the Supreme Court (See Kharak Sing v State of U.P. (AIR1963 SC 1295) Olga Tellis and others v. Bombay MunicipalCorporation (AIR 1986 SC 180) has been further expanded in FrancisCoralie v. Union Territory of Delhi (AIR 1981 SC 746), by thestatement “that any act which damages or injures or interferes with theuse of any limb or faculty of a person, either permanently or eventemporarily, would be within the inhibition of Article 21”. Then, it washeld that the right to life with human dignity enshrined under Article 21derives its life breath from the Directive Principles of State Policy andparticularly clause (e) and (f) of Article 39 and Articles 41 and 42 of theConstitution. 25. Ext.P3 which is a true copy of the study report of WHO (it isof the year 2003)on the portrayal of tobacco in Indian cinema waspressed into service by the learned counsel for the petitioner. A researchwas conducted on how the tobacco industry has leveraged to cinema toreinforce the image around their brands and how cinema in turn haspromoted the cause of tobacco. The research was aimed at understanding W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:20:-the degree of influence the tobacco industry has on Indian cinema. Thereport states that the impact of this on youth has been devastating asstudies have shown that non-smoking teens whose favorite stars smokefrequently on screen are 16 times more likely to develop positiveattitudes towards smoking. The following extract from the report wouldreveal the gravity of the situation:“India, with its billion-strong population and nearly 250million tobacco users, is one of the prime target markets fortobacco companies. Cigarette users comprise just 14% of thetotal tobacco using population. This presents a big opportunityfor cigarette manufacturers who are increasingly looking atyouth to grow their sales. The 15-24 year old population standsat 199.2 million and is projected to grow to 231 million by 2013.Nearly 5 million children under the age of fifteen are addicted totobacco. According to National Family Health Survey, 20% ofthe India's adult male population and 2.5% of India's adultfemale population smoke and 28% of the India's male populationand 12% of India's female population consume other forms oftobacco.”26. It is true that the indirect advertisement through films andother visual media resorted to by the national and multinational tobaccocompanies are having greater impact on the society. So, it is only just W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:21:-and proper that appropriate directions are issued to the respondents toprevent indirect advertisements in films and other visual media. It is alsotrue that scenes depicting the use of tobacco and its allied products oftenappear in films and other visual media taking advantage of the leewaysin the enactments. This can be curtailed only by proper enforcement ofthe provisions of the COTPA and its allied Rules as well as of theCinematograph Act and the Guidelines issued thereunder.27. The Legislature, being familiar with local conditions, isprimarily, the judge of the necessity of enactments. If there exists acondition or state of affairs requiring the Legislature of the State toexercise its conceded right to enact laws for the protection of health,safety or welfare of the people, State can enact laws. Here, theParliament in its wisdom has enacted laws to curb the menace arising outof the use of tobacco. The indiscriminate propagation of advertisementthrough films and other visual media without any proper restrictions, aswell as, non implementation of the provisions of COTPA and its alliedRules as aforesaid, would infringe upon the right to life of the citizen,which is guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. If the W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:22:-executing agency fails to implement the provisions of a statute, there isscope for judicial interference. Thus, prayers in this writ petition arerelevant.28. The five writs made mention of in Article 226 of theConstitution of India are known in English law as prerogative writs, forthey had originated in the King's prerogative power of superintendenceover the due observance of law by his officers and tribunals. However,the language used in Article 226 is very wide and does not confine thepower of the High Courts to the issuing of prerogative writs only. (SeeRashid Ahammed v Municipal Board, Kairana (AIR 1950 S.C. 163).The power under this Article extends to the issuing of “directions, ordersor writs, including the writs mentioned in the Article, or any of them”.The power under Article 226 can be exercised to meet the ends of justicein all cases where there is a specific legal right but no specific legalremedy for enforcing that right. Nothing is better settled than that. Thereis scope for judicial interference where there is a denial of right orsubstantial failure of justice.29. We repel the contentions of the Central Government that the W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:23:-extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of Indiacannot be invoked for the implementation of the provisions of a statute.The argument that no specific instance of violation has been pointed outdoes not inspire confidence in us. Search for examples of violationwould be a futile exercise. It is relevant to note that there is nocategorical denial of the allegations levelled against the authorities whoare duty bound to implement the mandate prescribed by the provisions ofCOTPA and its allied Rules, as well as, the Cinematograph Act, 1952.Though certain instructions were said to have been given, they remain inpaper. The reports filed on behalf of the 3rd respondent and on behalf ofthe Director of Public Instructions, Thiruvananthapuram, do not revealwhether any effective measures were taken for ensuring the properimplementation of the provisions of COTPA and its allied Rules. Also,there is no proper machinery for implementation. The result is thatviolations of the provisions of the COTPA and its allied Rules are beingcontinued and the mischief sought to be remedied grows like anything inthe society, resulting in substantial failure of justice which calls for aninterference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:24:-30. Having bestowed our anxious consideration over the entirecircumstances of the case, we are of the definite view that there exists agrave situation on account of the violations of the provisions of theCigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisementand Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply andDistribution) Act, 2003 and its allied Rules as well as CinematographAct, 1952, which calls for an interference by this Court in exercise of thepowers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 31. Accordingly, we dispose of this writ petition by issuing thefollowing directions:(1) Respondents 1, 2 and 4 shall ensure that no scenes aredepicted in films, tele-serials and other visual media whichwould violate the provisions of COTPA and its allied Rules.(2) Respondents 1, 2 and 3 are directed strictly to implement theprovisions of Prohibition on Sale of Cigarettes and OtherTobacco Products around Education Institutions Rules, 2004,and ensure that no tobacco products of whatever nature aresold within 100 yards measured radially starting from theouter limit of the boundary wall or fence or as the case may beof the educational institutions. W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:25:-32. For the appropriate implementation of the aforesaid directions,the following measures also shall be taken:(a) School Protection Committees be formed in all schools,which shall be chaired by the Head of the Institution. Arepresentative of the Parents or Teachers duly selected by the Headof the Institution, the Local Station House Officer and the SchoolLeader shall be the members of the said Committee. It shall be theduty of this Committee to set the law in motion against the violatorsof the provisions of COTPA and its allied Rules, on its own motionor on a complaint in that regard. The action as above, shall betaken within 15 days from the date of receipt of the informationregarding the violation. The Committee shall meet atleast once in amonth(b) There shall be a District Level Monitoring Committee ineach district chaired by the District Collector. The DistrictEducational Officer, the District Medical Officer and the Chief ofPolice in the District shall be its members. It shall be the duty ofthis Committee to periodically supervise the functioning of theSchool Protection Committee in their district. If it is brought to thenotice of the District Level Monitoring Committee that no actionwas taken on time against the violators by the School ProtectionCommittee, the District Level Monitoring Committee can set thelaw in motion against the violators. The said Committee can also W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:26:-recommend action against the authorities of the school which donot honour these directions. The District Level MonitoringCommittee shall have the power to conduct surprise inspection ofany school premises and the surroundings in their district to ensurethat these directions are complied with in letter and spirit. TheCommittee shall meet atleast once in three months. It shall be theendeavour of the District Level Monitoring Committee to sensitizethe school children within their district about the evil effects of theuse of tobacco and allied products through seminars, campaignsand other effective methods. In this endeavour, the District LevelMonitoring Committee shall seek assistance of the Kerala StateLegal Service Authority or the District Legal Services Authority.(c) There shall be a State Level Monitoring Committeewhich shall be chaired by the Secretary, Home Department. TheSecretary, Health Department, the Secretary, EducationDepartment, the Police Chief and the Director of PublicInstructions shall be its members. It shall be the duty of thisCommittee, to ensure that the School Protection Committees areformed as above. This Committee shall ensure the performance ofthe District Level Monitoring Committees by calling for periodicalreports from the District Level Monitoring Committees. ThisCommittee shall meet atleast once in six months. This Committeewill also formulate guidelines that may be used by the DistrictLevel Monitoring Committees for the purpose of monitoring the W.P(C) No.38513 of 2010 -:27:-function of the School Protection Committees. The guidelines soissued shall indicate the most appropriate monitoring mechanisms.A copy of the guidelines so formulated shall be forwarded to thisCourt within two months from today. This writ petition shall stand posted after two months forcompliance report.The registry shall forward a copy of the judgment to the ChiefSecretary, Government of Kerala forthwith. Sd/- MANJULA CHELLUR, AG. CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, JUDGE//TRUE COPY//P.A TO JUDGEkrj