SSCR No. 9 of 2021 (Sabarimala Special Commissioner Report) – Suo Motu

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR** **TUESDAY, THE 16[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 25TH KARTHIKA, 1943 SSCR NO. 9 OF 2021** ## **PETITIONER:** **SUO MOTU** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANTHANCODE, KAWDIAR POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA - 695003, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.** - **2 STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 001. CORRRECTED AS PER ORDER DATED 15/11/2021** - **3 PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695024** - **4 PROJECT DIRECTOR NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA (NHAI) TC 36/574-1,KRISHNAN KRIPA PALKULANGARA JUNCTION, PALKULANGARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. KERALA-695024 (* 3 AND 4 IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DATED 15/11/2021 IN SSCR NO.9 of 2021) BY SMT I.SHEELA DEVI - STANDING COUNSEL NHAI SRI S.RAJMOHAN - SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI G.BIJU - STANDING COUNSEL, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD** **THIS SABARIMALA SPECIAL COMMISSIONER REPORT HAVING COME UP** **FOR ADMISSION ON 16.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** SSCR No.9 of 2021 2 ## **ORDER** ## **Anil K. Narendran, J.** The Special Commissioner, Sabarimala, has filed this Report seeking an order directing the State of Kerala, the concerned Officers of the Public Works Department (Roads Division), Kerala State Transport Project, National Highways Authority of India and also the Road Safety Commissioner to file status report regarding the maintenance and repair of the road network in the State used for Sabarimala Pilgrimage. In the said Report the Special Commissioner has pointed out the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court dated 21.02.2013 in W.P.(C)No.27011 of 2012, imposing prohibition in erection of advertisement boards and hoardings completely or partially, according to the need of a particular location; the directions issued by the Devaswom Bench in its order dated 10.06.2015 in SSCR No.22 of 2014 regarding maintenance of the entire road network in the State before the 1[st] week of November every year and directing the Director General of Police, the Road Safety Commissioner, the Chief Engineers of the Public Works Department, National Highway Authority of India and SSCR No.9 of 2021 3 also the Local Self Government Department to comply with the directions of the Division Bench in the judgment in W.P. (C)No.27011 of 2012, in relation to the roads leading to Sabarimala. 2. On 15.11.2021, when this report came up for consideration, the Principal Secretary to Government, Public Works Department and also the Project Director, National Highways Authority of India (NHAI), Thiruvananthapuram, were impleaded as additional respondents 3 and 4. The learned Senior Government Pleader and also the learned Standing Counsel for NHAI were directed to get instructions. 3. Today, when this report is taken up for consideration, the learned Senior Government Pleader, on instructions from the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department (Roads Division), Pathanamthitta, would submit that out of the 12 'identified roads' for Sabarimala Pilgrimage the repairs and maintenance work of 12 roads are fully completed. Insofar as Plappilly – Aaghamuzhi – Chittar - Vadasserikkara road having total length of 35.5 km is concerned, the work relating to laying of pipeline to the SSCR No.9 of 2021 4 drinking water project of the Kerala Water Authority at Nilakkal is going on in 6.7 kms. stretch. The Public Works Department will be able to complete the maintenance and repair in this stretch only if the work undertaken by the Kerala Water Authority is completed. In this stretch, barricades have already been erected to facilitate vehicular traffic on one side. Insofar as 7 other 'identified roads' are concerned, the repair and maintenance work of 6 roads have already been completed. In Gavi-Moozhiyar road having a total length of 73 kms., tarring work of Kakki-Plappilly road (6.5 kms. stretch) could not be completed due to heavy rain. In this stretch potholes have already been filled up. All other roads leading to Sabarimala under Pathanamthitta Roads Division have already been repaired. For removing hoardings and encroachments on road pavements works have already been started. 4. In **C.S.S. Motor Service v. Madras State [AIR 1953 Madras 279]** a Division Bench of the Madras High Court held that all public streets and roads vest in the State, but that the State holds them as trustee on behalf of the public. The members of the public are entitled as beneficiaries to use them SSCR No.9 of 2021 5 as a matter of right and this right is limited only by the similar rights possessed by every other citizen to use the pathways. The State as trustees on behalf of the public is entitled to impose all such limitations on the character and extent of the user as may be requisite for protecting the rights of the public generally. In **Saghir Ahmad v. State of U.P. and others [AIR 1954 SC 728]** a Constitution Bench of the Apex Court agreed with the statement of law made by the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in Para. 24 of the decision in **C.S.S. Motor Service** . 5. In **Sodan Singh v. New Delhi Municipal Committee [1989 (4) SCC 155]** a Constitution Bench of the Apex Court held that the primary object of building roads is undoubtedly to facilitate people to travel from one point to another. 6. In **Centre for Consumer Education v. State of Kerala and others [2019 (3) KHC 957]** a Division Bench of this Court was dealing with W.P.(C)No.27011 of 2012, a public interest litigation, raising questions touching upon the safety of passengers commuting through public roads in the State. One SSCR No.9 of 2021 6 of the reliefs sought for in that writ petition is a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents therein to initiate steps to remove all types of obstruction in roads and road margins and recover the costs from those responsible for erecting the same, and also to erect and establish proper destination boards and traffic signals in the public roads leading to Sabarimala. In the said writ petition, the State Police Chief filed a counter affidavit through the Assistant Inspector General of Police, Thiruvananthapuram admitting the large number of unauthorised advertisements and hoardings in the National Highways as well as in the State Highways, blocking the line of sight of drivers and also causing distraction to the drivers. In the counter affidavit, it has also been stated that all District Police Chiefs have been alerted to take appropriate actions to see that advertisement/sign boards which are obstructing the vision of the road users shall be removed by seeking assistance of other Departments. Reports have been called for from the District Police Chiefs regarding the cases registered in connection with the erection of illegal boards or flex boards on road margins, etc. SSCR No.9 of 2021 7 7. In **Centre for Consumer Education** , after considering the averments in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Director General of Police, the Division Bench of this Court in its judgment dated 21.02.2013 in W.P. (C)No.27011 of 2012 opined that the State and its law and order administration are on their toes in ensuring safety of the users of the National Highways and State Highways as also other roads, particularly, in the context of the danger caused by unauthorised erection of the hoardings and advertisement boards. The Division Bench observed that the grievance of the petitioner Society stands redressed for the present and the State would act in accordance with the statements in the counter affidavit made on behalf of the State Police Chief. But looking at the totality of the circumstances, the Division Bench deemed it fit to direct the 3[rd] respondent Transport Commissioner, to take appropriate action through the officers deployed towards the end of law and order administration and ensure that the various enactments referred to in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State Police Chief and in Ext.P1 petition filed by the petitioner therein are implemented with SSCR No.9 of 2021 8 the zeal and promptitude the situation calls for and in appropriate circumstances and situations; co-ordinate with the Local Self Government Institutions to prohibit erection of advertisement boards and hoardings completely or partially according to the need of a particular location. In the said judgment, the Division Bench has also noted the stand of the National Highway Authority of India that the Local Self Government Institutions have absolutely no authority to sanction erection of the hoardings or advertisement boards in National Highways. Paragraphs 4, 5 and also the last paragraph of the judgment of the Division Bench read thus; “4. In the context of the counter affidavit filed and the statements made therein, we are of the opinion that the State and its law and order administration are on their toes in ensuring safety of the users of the National and State highways as also other roads particularly in the context of the danger caused by unauthorised erection of the hoardings and advertisement boards. We are sure that the grievance of the petitioner stands redressed for the present and the State would act in accordance with the statements in the counter affidavit, made on behalf of the Police Chief. 5. However, we confess to a disquiet and foreboding in our minds, more so, by what we see on the roads on a SSCR No.9 of 2021 9 daily basis. We are not for a moment doubting the statement made in the counter affidavit nor are we importing our personal knowledge into deciding this issue. But looking at the totality of the circumstances, we deem it fit that we direct the 3[rd] respondent to take appropriate action through the officers deployed towards the end of law and order administration and ensure that various enactments referred to in the counter affidavit and Ext.P1 are implemented with the zeal, and promptitude the situation calls for and in appropriate circumstances and situations; coordinate with the Local Self Government Institutions to prohibit erection of advertisement boards and hoardings completely or partially according to the need of a particular location. We also had the benefit of hearing the learned counsel for the National Highway Authority of India, who has stated before us that the Local Self Government Institutions have absolutely no authority to sanction erection of the hoardings or advertisement boards in the national highways. We need not alert the authority of the National Highway Authority of India in the State, to bring such incidents to the notice of the 3[rd] respondent; who is duty bound to prohibit the same. In the circumstances, and in the context of the statements made in the counter affidavit, we close the writ petition with the aforementioned directions. The parties are left to suffer their costs.” 8. By the order dated 10.06.2015 in S.S.C.R.No.22 of 2014, the Devaswom Bench directed the State Government, in SSCR No.9 of 2021 10 particular the Public Works Department, and the National Highways Authority of India to commence and complete the maintenance of the entire road network in the State before the 1[st] week of November every year. The State Government is further directed to grant administrative sanction for the maintenance of the road at least 3 months before the commencement of the festival. The Director General of Police, the Road Safety Commissioner, the Chief Engineers of the Public Works Department and National Highway Authority of India and also the Local Self Government Department are directed to comply with the directions of the Division Bench in **Centre for Consumer Education v. State of Kerala and others [2019 (3) KHC 957]** in relation to the roads leading to Sabarimala. 9. In **Shani Johnson v. Kochi Corporation and another [2019 (3) KHC 928]** this Court noticed that, ‘Policy on Roadside Advertisements’ formulated by the Indian Road Congress, vide IRC:46-1972 was introduced when it was noticed that advertisement can often distract the attention of drivers of motor vehicles and in that case a public hazard or SSCR No.9 of 2021 11 nuisance. They may also obstruct the view of the drivers of fast-moving vehicles and are then a public danger. Para.2 of IRC:46-1972 deals with advertisement control; Para.3 deals with principles on advertisement control; etc. he Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, vide Circular No.RW/NH-33044/ 35/2001/S&R(R) dated 16.05.2002 has made it clear that no advertisement hoardings are permitted on National Highways within the Right of Way (ROW) except informatory signs of public interest such as hospitals, bus stations, etc. or advertisement of temporary nature announcing local events such as Mela, Flower Show, etc. Besides, IRC:46-1972 titled ‘A Policy on Roadside Advertisements’ published in 1972 should also be referred for comprehensive guidelines on advertisement control on National Highways. The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways in its letter No. F. No. RW/NH33044/18/2016/S&R (R) dated 07.09.2016 noticed that despite the Ministry's policy of not allowing roadside advertisements, hoardings on National Highways which cause distraction and is also one of the causes of accidents on National Highways, advertisement hoardings have generally SSCR No.9 of 2021 12 been noticed along the National Highways. Therefore, it was decided that the Regional Officers/Engineering Liasoning Officers within their jurisdiction shall inspect the National Highways by prioritising heavily traffic National Highways and other National Highways in stages and submit inspection reports to the Ministry for further necessary action, along with their monthly reports. However, reports from the Regional Officers/Engineering Liasoning Officers are not being received by the Ministry and therefore, the Ministry vide letter dated 07.09.2016 directed all the implementing agencies and Regional Officers/Engineering Liasoning Officers to do joint inspection of all National Highways within their jurisdiction and sent a consolidated report regarding advertisement hoardings to the Ministry for further necessary action. A copy of the said - - letter is addressed to all Engineers in Chief and Chief Engineers of Public Works Departments of State/Union Territories dealing with National Highways and other Centrally Sponsored Schemes. 10. In **Shani Johnson** this Court held that, in view of the provisions under Section 23 of the Control of National SSCR No.9 of 2021 13 Highway (Land and Traffic) Act, 2002, all lands forming part of a National Highway shall vest in the Central Government and as such any Local Self Government Institution in the State have no authority to permit erection of advertisement boards either on the sodium vapour lamp posts or all lands appurtenant to the highways, bridges, culverts, etc. which would come under the purview of clause (e) of Section 2 of the said Act. In view of the ‘Policy on Roadside Advertisements’ formulated by the Indian Road Congress, vide IRC:46-1972, and also the Circular dated 16.05.2002 issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, no advertisement hoardings can be permitted on National Highways within the Right of Way, except informatory signs of public interest such as hospitals, bus stations, etc. or advertisement of temporary nature such as Mela, Flower Show, etc. In Circular dated 16.05.2002, it has been made clear that IRC:46-1972 should be referred to for comprehensive guidelines on advertisement control on National Highways. 11. In **Shani Johnson** this Court noticed that, the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways reiterated its stand in SSCR No.9 of 2021 14 its letter dated 07.09.2016, when it was noticed that despite the Ministry's policy of not allowing roadside advertisements, hoardings on National Highways which cause distraction and is one of the causes of accidents on National Highways, have generally been noticed along the National Highways. Therefore, the Regional Officers/Engineering Liaison Officers are directed to submit inspection reports to the Ministry for further necessary action, along with their monthly reports. A copy of the said letter is addressed to all Engineers-in-Chief and Chief Engineers of Public Work Departments of State/Union Territories dealing with National Highways and other Centrally Sponsored Schemes. Strict compliance of the aforesaid Circular and letter issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways is highly essential, since distraction of drivers of motor vehicles is one of the major causes of motor accidents. 12. In **Shani Johnson** this Court directed the Project Director of the National Highway Authority of India and also the concerned officers in the Kerala Public Works Department dealing with National Highways and other Centrally Sponsored Schemes to ensure strict compliance of Circular dated SSCR No.9 of 2021 15 16.05.2002 and also the letter dated 07.09.2016 of the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways. 13. In **Shali v. State of Kerala [(2019) 5 KHC 118]** this Court held that, as per Para.4.2 of the Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities [IRC:103-2012], an effort should be made to create such conditions that pedestrians are not forced to walk in unsafe circumstances, and that the motorists respect the position of pedestrian. The Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities have the approval of the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH). Every local authority in the State is bound to provide pedestrian facilities on public roads in conformity with these guidelines. 14. In **Kottamom (Kottiyar Mangalam) Sri.Darmasastha Temple Advisory Committee v. State of Kerala [2019 (5) KHC SN 27]** this Court held that, in view of the Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities formulated by the Indian Roads Congress, vide IRC:103-2012, no parking of vehicles is legally permissible on the ‘footpath’, which is the portion of right of way of road used for the movement of pedestrians. Any such parking of vehicles on the footpath of SSCR No.9 of 2021 16 public streets will force pedestrians to walk in unsafe circumstances, which will adversely affect the mobility and safety of all pedestrians including those with disabilities and reduced mobility. 15. In exercise of the powers under Section 118 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and in supersession of the Rules of Road Regulations, 1989, the Central Government made the Motor Vehicles (Driving) Regulations, 2017, vide G.S.R.634(E) dated 23.06.2017. Regulation 5 of the Motor Vehicles (Driving) Regulations, 2017 deals with duties of drivers and riders. As per clause (4) of Regulation 5, the driver and the riders shall take special care and precautions to ensure the safety of the most vulnerable road users such as pedestrians, cyclists, children, elderly and the differently-abled persons. Regulation 22 deals with stopping and parking. As per sub-clause (c) of clause (2) of Regulation 22, a vehicle shall not be parked on footpath, cycle path and pedestrian crossing. Regulation 39 deals with pedestrian crossing, footpath and cycle track. As per sub-clause (3) of Regulation 39, when a road is provided with a footpath or cycle track, no vehicle shall drive on such SSCR No.9 of 2021 17 footpath or track, except on the directions of a Police Officer in uniform or where traffic signs permitting some movements have been displayed. 16. In **Sivaprasad v. State of Kerala and others [2020 (6) KHC 373]** this Court held that, in view of the law laid down in **Kottamom (Kottiyar Mangalam) Sri. Darmasastha Temple Advisory Committee [2019 (5) KHC SN 27]** , once the National Highways/State Highways are constructed as per the standards and guidelines prescribed by the Indian Roads Congress, it has to be maintained as such without any encroachment on the right of way or on the pedestrian facilities provided as per such standards and guidelines. 17. In **Sivaprasad** this Court held that, the primary object of building roads is to facilitate people to travel from one point to another and carriage of goods. Footpaths or pavements are public properties which are intended to serve the convenience of the general public. They are not laid for private use and indeed, their use for a private purpose frustrates the very object for which they are carved out from SSCR No.9 of 2021 18 portions of public streets. The main reason for laying out pavements is to ensure that the pedestrians are able to go about their daily affairs with reasonable measure of safety and security. That facility, which has matured into a right of the pedestrians, cannot be set at naught by allowing encroachments to be made on the pavements. 18. In **Sivaprasad** this Court held further that, removal of encroachments on the footpaths or pavements over which the public has the right of passage or access cannot be regarded as unreasonable, unfair or unjust. The State, being the principal protector of the rights of its citizens, keeping in view the doctrine of public trust, should not permit any encroachments on the footpaths or pavements. Nobody has got a right to erect any structures on roads. The State is not an exception. The National Highways and State Highways constructed by acquiring private property and by using public funds, can be used only for the travelling needs of public. It cannot be converted for other collateral purposes like erection of statues and memorials. 19. Section 5 of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of SSCR No.9 of 2021 19 Assemblies and Processions) Act, 2011 deals with regulation of conduct of festivals, assemblies, meetings, etc. In **Basil Attipetti v. State of Kerala and others [2012 (2) KHC 85]** a Division Bench of this Court declared clause (c) of subsection (1) of Section 5 of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, 2011 as violative of the fundamental rights of the citizens conferred under Article 19(1) (d) and Article 21 of the Constitution of India, by virtue of the operation of Article 13(2) of the Constitution. The Division Bench upheld the constitutional validity of clauses (a) and (d) of subsection (1) of Section 5 of the Act, subject to limitations and restrictions on permissions to be granted, as stated in Paras.9 to 11 of the judgment. 20. It is pertinent to note that, by the order dated 18.01.2013 in SLP(Civil)No.8519 of 2006 **[Union of India v. State of Gujarat and others]** , the Apex Court issued a general direction to the effect that, from the date of that order the Government of Kerala shall not grant any permission for installation of any statue or construction of any structure in public roads, pavements, sideways and other public utility SSCR No.9 of 2021 20 places. The Apex Court made it clear that the said order shall not apply to installation of high-mast lights, street lights or construction relating to electrification, traffic, toll or for development and beautification of streets, highways, roads, etc., and relating to public utility and facilities. The above order was made applicable to all other States and Union Territories and the concerned Chief Secretary/Administrator is directed to ensure compliance of that order. Paragraphs 2 to 5 of the order dated 18.01.2013 in I.A.No.10 of 2012 in SLP(Civil)No.8519 of 2006 read thus; “2. Mr. M.T. George, learned counsel for the State of Kerala placed before us a copy of the order dated September 7, 2011 passed by the Government of Kerala granting permission for installation of statue of late Shri N. Sundaran Nadar, Ex-Deputy Speaker of Kerala Legislative Assembly near to Neyyattinkara – Poovar Road in the curve turning to the KSRTC Bus Stand Neyyattinkara in the Kanyakumari National Highway near bus stand. 3. We have our doubt whether such permission could have been granted by the State Government for installation of statue on the national highway. 4. Until further orders, we direct that the status quo, as obtaining today, shall be maintained in all respects by all concerned with regard to the Triangle Island where SSCR No.9 of 2021 21 statue of late Shri N. Sundaran Nadar has been permitted to be sanctioned. We further direct that henceforth, State Government shall not grant any permission for installation of any statue or construction of any structure in public roads, pavements, sideways and other public utility places. Obviously, this order shall not apply to installation of high mast lights, street lights or construction relating to electrification, traffic, toll or for development and beautification of the streets, highways, roads, etc. and relating to public utility and facilities. 5. The above order shall also apply to all other states and union territories. The concerned Chief Secretary/ Administrator shall ensure compliance of the above order.” (underline supplied) 21. The order of the Apex Court dated 18.01.2013 in I.A.No.10 of 2012 in SLP(Civil)No.8519 of 2006 was in relation to the permission granted by the State of Kerala, by an order dated 07.09.2011, for installation of statue of late Shri.N.Sundaran Nadar, Ex-Deputy Speaker of Kerala Legislative Assembly near to Neyyantinkkara-Poovar Road in the curve turning to KSRTC bus stand, Neyyatinkkara in Kannyakumari National Highway. 22. By the order dated 05.07.2013 in SLP(Civil) No.8519 of 2006, the Apex Court directed the States and SSCR No.9 of 2021 22 Union Territories to state on affidavit the position with regard to unauthorised structures including unauthorised religious structures on public roads, pavements, sideways and other public utility places as existing on 30.06.2013 in their respective States and the steps taken up to 30.06.2013 for removal of such unauthorised structures. In the said order, the Apex Court noticed the submission of the learned counsel for the States of Madhya Pradesh, Kerala, Punjab and Rajasthan that they have already filed their affidavits. By the order dated 05.07.2013, the Apex Court directed the States of Madhya Pradesh, Kerala, Punjab and Rajasthan to file fresha ffidavits indicating the position as on 30.06.2013. 23. By the order dated 31.01.2018 in SLP(Civil) No.8519 of 2006 and connected cases, the Apex Court ordered that the implementation of its orders should be supervised by the concerned High Courts. Consequently, the Apex Court remitted the matters to the respective High Courts for ensuring implementation of orders in an effective manner. While ordering transmission of concerned records to the respective High Courts, the Apex Court ordered that, the interim orders SSCR No.9 of 2021 23 wherever passed shall continue, until the matters are considered by the High Courts. In case any clarification is required, it would be open to the parties to approach the Apex Court. The High Court will have the jurisdiction to proceed in the contempt of any of the orders passed by the Apex Court. 24. Despite the enactment of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, 2011 by the State Legislature and the law laid down by the Apex Court and this Court in the decisions referred to supra, the 1st respondent State and the law enforcement machinery have not taken necessary steps to to ensure strict enforcement of the relevant statutory provisions and also the Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities formulated by Indian Roads congress [IRC:103-2012], in order to prevent encroachment of any nature, in any form, either temporary or permanent, on the right of way or on the pedestrian facilities on public roads, since any such encroachment will adversely affect the mobility and safety of all pedestrians including those with disabilities and reduced mobility. 25. Once roads are constructed as per the standards SSCR No.9 of 2021 24 and guidelines prescribed by the Indian Roads Congress, it has to be maintained as such without any encroachment on the right of way or on the pedestrian facilities provided as per such standards and guidelines. Footpaths are not intended for stocking articles for trade or for display of goods by traders, in front of their shops or establishments. Similarly, footpaths are not intended for the purpose of holding campaigns, demonstrations, etc., by political parties and other organisations, by causing any obstruction whatsoever to free movement of pedestrians. No political party or organisation can be permitted to encroach footpath or right of way of public roads, in connection with any such protest, demonstrations, etc., by erecting any temporary structures on the right of way or on the pedestrian facilities, forcing pedestrians including those with disabilities and reduced mobility to walk in unsafe circumstances. 26. Showing scant regard to the law laid down in the decisions referred to supra, political parties and various organisations are permitted to put up structures on footpaths and even on the right of way on public roads, all over the SSCR No.9 of 2021 25 State. The protesters/agitators having political backing are even permitted to lay carpet and place chairs on the footpath. On account of such encroachments, pedestrians including those with disabilities and reduced mobility are forced to walk through the right of way of public roads, in unsafe circumstances. 27. The prohibition imposed by this Court in the judgments in **Centre for Consumer Education [2019 (3) KHC 957]** and **Shani Johnson [2019 (3) KHC 928]** in erection of advertisement boards and hoardings and the prohibition imposed by the Apex Court in **Union of India v. State of Gujarat and others** [SLP(Civil)No.8519 of 2006] whereby the Government of Kerala is restrained, with effect from 18.01.2013, from granting any permission for installation of any statue or construction of any structure in public roads, pavements, sideways and other public utility places are flouted, by permitting unauthorised hoardings, structures, etc., on public roads, pavements, footpaths, etc. The law laid down by this Court in **Shali [2019 (5) KHC 118]** , **Kottamom (Kottiyar Mangalam) Sri.Darmasastha Temple Advisory** SSCR No.9 of 2021 26 ## **Committee [2019 (5) KHC SN 27]** and **Sivaprasad [2020** **(6) KHC 373]** that every local authority in the State is bound to provide pedestrian facilities on public roads in conformity with the Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities [IRC:103-2012] and that once the National Highways/State Highways are constructed as per the standards and guidelines prescribed by the Indian Roads Congress, it has to be maintained as such without any encroachment on the right of way or on the pedestrian facilities provided as per such standards and guidelines are flouted by permitting encroachments on the right of way and on the pedestrian facilities. 28. In such circumstances, we deem it appropriate to direct respondents 2 to 4 to take necessary steps to ensure strict compliance of the directions contained in the decision referred to supra by all concerned, in letter and spirit, by maintaining the roads and pedestrian facilities in the State strictly in conformity with the relevant standards and guidelines, without any encroachment whatsoever on the right of way or on the pedestrian facilities provided as per such standards and guidelines, in order to ensure the safety of most SSCR No.9 of 2021 27 vulnerable road users, such as pedestrians, cyclists, children, elderly and the differently-abled persons. We also record the statement made by the learned Senior Government Pleader, on instructions from the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department (Roads Division), Pathanamthitta, that for removing hoardings and encroachments on road pavements works have already been started. In the result, this SSCR is disposed of as above. Sd/- **ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE** Sd/- **P.G. AJITHKUMAR JUDGE** **yd**