Suhara Beevi v. Regional Transport Authority, Kottayam and Others

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** ## **WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 3RD ASWINA, 1941** ## **WP(C).No.27707 OF 2018(K)** ## **PETITIONER:** **SUHARA BEEVI, AGED 36 YEARS, W/O.HAMEED K.H., MADAVANACHALIL HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 513.** ## **BY ADV. NOBLE MATHEW** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, KOTTAYAM - 686 001** - **2 JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, KANJIRAPALLY.** - **3 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE MUNDAKAYAM POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **4 DY. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE KANIRAPALLY.** - **5 MUNDAKAYAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, MUNDAKAYAM.P.O., PIN-686513, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.** - **6 RASHEED.P.H., PUTHUPPARAMBIL HOUSE, PUTHENCHANTHA, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513.** - **7 SALIMON PUTHENPARAMBIL, RPC P.O., MUNDAKKAYAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT** - ADDL. **8 TRAFFIC REGULATORY COMMITTEE MUNDAKAYAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, THE PRESIDENT, MUNDAKAYAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MUNDAKAYAM PO, PIN-686513. (ADDL.R8 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 17/09/2018 IN IA.NO.01/2018)** - ADDL. **9 SAMEER, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O ALI, RESIDING AT PUTHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** WP(C).No.27707 OF 2018(K) 2 - **10 MOHANAN, AGED 67 YEARS S/O SREEDHARAN, RESIDING AT 28, KOLLAMPARAMBIL, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **11 MOHAMMAD NIYAS, AGED 39 YEARS S/O SAYED MUHAMMED, RESIDING AT VATTAKAPARAYIL, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **12 SHIHAD, AGED 38 YEARS S/O KASSIM, RESIDING AT PUTHUPARAMBIL, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **13 JIBIN NOORDEEN, AGED 27 YEARS S/O NOORDEEN M.S, RESIDING AT MADATHIL HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **14 ANISH HAMEED, AGED 36 YEARS S/O HAMEED, RESIDING AT 6/744, PUTHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **15 BADARUDEEN, AGED 40 YEARS S/O HUSSAIN, RESIDING AT AYAPPARA HOUSE, VARIKANI, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **16 SHAN P.K., AGED 31 YEARS S/O KASSIM, RESIDING AT PUTHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **17 JAMES MATHEW, AGED 32 YEARS S/O MATHEW PHILIP, RESIDING AT CHETAKKATTU HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **18 JAMES MATHEW (JOMON), AGED 32 YEARS S/O MATHEW PHILIP, RESIDING AT CHETAKKATTU HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **19 NISHAD, AGED 42 YEARS S/O HABEEB, RESIDING AT PUTHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **20 SIVANKUTTY, AGED 36 YEARS S/O KUTTAPANASARI, RESIDING AT CHERUNILATH HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **21 MOHAMMED SHARIF, AGED 56 YEARS S/O BASHEER, RESIDING AT 6/158 (5/179), PALATHUNKAL HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** WP(C).No.27707 OF 2018(K) 3 - **22 AJIMON, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O P.S ABDULKHADAR, RESIDING AT ANJILIMOOTTIL HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **23 SUNEES KUMAR, AGED 47 YEARS S/O BHASKARAN, RESIDING AT VALIPLAKAL HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **24 JAMESKUTTY, AGED 57 YEARS S/O JOSEPH, RESIDING AT 174, CHETTIPARMBIL HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **25 SUNIL KUMAR, AGED 27 YEARS S/O SUKUMARAN, RESIDING AT PALAMOOTTIL, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **26 SHAJAHAN, AGED 25 YEARS S/O PAREETHU KUNJU, RESIDING AT 6/724, PUTHUPARAMBIL, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **27 MADHU, AGED 52 YEARS S/O KUNJAPPAN, RESIDING AT PAZHAYAMANACKAL HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **28 ANIL KUMAR, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O RAJAPPAN, RESIDING AT KALLUTHOTTIPURAYIDAM HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **29 RAMEES RAHIM, AGED 27 YEARS S/O RAHIM, RESIDING AT PUTHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **30 SHAJAHAN, AGED 58 YEARS S/O PAREETHU KANNU, RESIDING AT PUTHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **31 NADEER, AGED 46 YEARS S/O SAIDALAVI, RESIDING AT THOTTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. (ADDL.R9 TO R31 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 01/10/2018 IN IA.NO.02/2018)** - ADDL. **32 HARIKUMAR K.B., AGED 31 YEARS S/O SUKUMARAN, RESIDING AT KOCHUVETTIL, RPC P.O, PIN-686513, MUDAKKAYAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** WP(C).No.27707 OF 2018(K) 4 - **33 NESIN IQUBAL, AGED 29 YEARS S/O IQUBAL, RESIDING AT PADAYIL HOUSE, PUTHENCHANDHA P.O., PIN-686514, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **34 SHAJI, AGED 38 YEARS S/O RAJAPPAN, RESIDING AT KURATHIYATTU VEEDU, RPC P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **35 SAJEEV, AGED 44 YEARS S/O RAKAPPAN, RESIDING AT KURATHIYATTU VEEDU, RPC P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **36 SINO, AGED 21 YEARS S/O SIBI JOSEPH, RESIDING AT URAMBUKALLAN, KARINILAM P.O., PIN-686514, MUNDAKKAYAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **37 SIBI JOHN, AGED 35 YEARS S/O YOHANAN, RESIDING AT AMBARAYIL HOUSE, RPC P.O., PIN-686513, VANDAMPATHAL, MUNDAKKAYAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **38 P.A RASHEED, AGED 45 YEARS S/O ABDUL KHADAR, RESIDING AT PULIMOOTTIL HOUSE, RPC P.O., PIN-686513, MUNDAKKAYAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **39 BINU JOSEPH, AGED 42 YEARS S/O O.M JOSEPH, RESIDING AT URAMBUKALLAN, KARINILAM P.O., PIN-686514, MUNDAKKAYAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **40 BIBIN GEORGE, AGED 30 YEARS S/O MONACHAN, RESIDING AT AMBATTU HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, VENGAKUNNU, PUTHENCHANDHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **41 PRINCE, AGED 48 YEARS S/O JOSEPH, RESIDING AT CHETTIPARAMBIL, KARINILAM P.O., PIN-686514, MUNDAKKAYAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **42 SINILKUMAR P.S., AGED 33 YEARS S/O SUKUMARAN, RESIDING AT PALAMOOTTIL HOSUE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** - **43 SIJU THOMAS, AGED 40 YEARS S/O VARKEY THOMAS, RESIDING AT THANAYASSERIL, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** WP(C).No.27707 OF 2018(K) 5 **44 RIYAS HAMEED, AGED 30 YEARS S/O HABEEB, RESIDING AT PUTHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, PUTHENCHANDHA , KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 45 ANEESH, AGED 36 YEARS S/O HANEEFA, RESIDING AT PUTHUPARMBIL, NEW MARKET, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O., PIN-686513, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** **(ADDL.R32 TO R45 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 31/10/2018 IN IA.NO.03/2018)** **SRI.LIJI J. VADAKKEDOM, SC. SRI.P.A.SALIM SMT.K.AMMINIKKUTTY, SR.GP** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25.09.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** WP(C).No.27707 OF 2018(K) 6 ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner submits that she is running a business at Mundakkayam under the name and style “New Models” and has filed this writ petition being aggrieved by the fact that the ingress and egress to her business is being obstructed illegally by the various autorickshaws that are allegedly parked illegally in front of it. She, therefore, prays that the competent Authorities be directed to immediately remove such obstruction and that the autorickshaw drivers, who have been arrayed as respondents 6, 7, and 9 to 45, be directed not to park their vehicles illegally. 2. The learned standing counsel for the fifth respondent - Grama Panchayat, submits that a Traffic Regulatory Committee has been constituted for the Panchayat with its President as its Chairman and that the said Committee has also been impleaded on the party array as eighth respondent. He says that it has been recognised by this Court in various judgments, including **Jestine Thomas and Others v. Circle Inspector of Police** **and Others** [2019 (2) KHC 610], that going by the statutory scheme as is available today under the Kerala Police Act, the Traffic Regulatory Committee must look into these issues and then make arrangements to ensure that the transport vehicles, WP(C).No.27707 OF 2018(K) 7 including autorickshaws, are accommodated properly within the confines of the Panchayat and in designated halting areas. He says that if this Court is so inclined, the eighth respondent - Traffic Regulatory Committee and the fifth respondent - Grama Panchayat can look into the complaints of the petitioner and take an appropriate decision thereon without any further delay. 3. The learned counsel appearing for respondents 6, 7, and 9 to 45 submits that the allegations of the petitioner are completely untrue and that, as is clear from Ext.P3 itself, the ingress and egress to her business has not been obstructed by any autorickshaw until now. He says that the area in question, in fact, has been accommodating the “Causeway stand” for the last several decades but that the petitioner has put up a building and started her business only in the year 2017, knowing fully well that it is in front of this stand. The learned counsel says that, therefore, the petitioner cannot be heard to say that the autorickshaws are obstructing her way, when she constructed a building with full knowledge that the “Causeway stand” is in front of it. 4. In response, Sri.Noble Mathew, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the “Causeway stand” is not in front of his client's building, as has been now asserted, but it is WP(C).No.27707 OF 2018(K) 8 nearly 15 meters away on the western side. He says that the respondent - autorickshaw drivers are, however, misusing the permits given to them in the name of this stand and are illegally parking autorickshaws in a haphazard manner in front of all the business establishments in the locality, including that of his client. He, therefore, prays that the concerned Authorities be directed to immediately abate this nuisance and remove all the autorickshaws that are parked illegally. 5. When I consider the afore submissions, it is obvious that it will not be possible for this Court to speak conclusively on the issues raised in this writ petition at the first instance, since these are matters that will have to be assessed and evaluated based on all relevant and germane factual circumstances. The question as to whether there is an autorikshaw stand in front of the petitioner's building for the last several years or otherwise is also one which is edificed on factual factors and which must, therefore, gain the attention of the competent Authorities without any further delay. 6. In the afore perspective, I find force in the submissions made on behalf of the Panchayat by Sri.Liji J. Vadakkedam, its learned standing counsel, that am persuaded to the opinion that the eight respondent - Traffic Regulatory Committee, in WP(C).No.27707 OF 2018(K) 9 conjunction with all other authorities including the Panchayat, must look into the complaint of the petitioner immediately and then issue appropriate proceedings/orders without any further delay. I am drawn to favour this course also because, by doing so, the dialectical interests of the parties can be adverted to by the Traffic Regulatory Committee and other concerned Authorities and necessary arrangements, as are warranted in law and under the Kerala Police Act, can be put in place to ensure that there are no violations by any person including respondents 6, 7, and 9 to 45. Resultantly, I order this writ petition and direct the Chairman of the eighth respondent - Traffic Regulatory Committee to convene its meeting within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, which will also be attended by all necessary Authorities including the Police, the Local Self Government Institutions and such other; and necessary decisions will be taken by it as regards the manner in which the autorickshaws are to be parked in the designated places available or to be identified. On such decisions being taken and necessary notification issued, which shall be done within a period of two weeks thereafter, the fifth respondent and respondents 3 and 4, who are the concerned WP(C).No.27707 OF 2018(K) 10 Police Officers, will ensure that they are implemented in its letter and spirit, invoking provisions of the Kerala Police Act as well as such other applicable Statutes, thereby ensuring that respondents 6, 7, and 9 to 45 do not park their vehicles in any manner except as sanctioned. Until such time, as the afore exercise is completed, the third respondent will act as per law as and when any complaint is brought to his notice by the petitioner regarding unauthorized obstruction being caused to her business by any of the party respondents herein or anyone else, and all necessary and requisite action will be taken to remove the same, if the complaint is found to be credible. **Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** stu **JUDGE** WP(C).No.27707 OF 2018(K) 11 ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** |**EXHIBIT P1**|**PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED BY THE 5TH**| |---|---| ||**RESPONDENT FOR CONDUCTING THE SHOP DATED**| ||**4.4.2018**| |**EXHIBIT P2**|**PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE LEASE DEED EXECUTED ON**| ||**3.8.2018 BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE OWNER**| ||**OF THE BUILDING**| |**EXHIBIT P3**|**PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN FROM THE NORTHERN SIDE OF THE**| ||**NATIONAL HIGHWAY EVIDENCING THE OBSTRUCTIONS**| ||**CAUSED BY THE UNAUTHORIZED PARKING OF THREE**| ||**AUTORICKSHAWS JUST IN FRONT OF THE PETITIONER'S**| ||**SHOP**| |**EXHIBIT P4**|**PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN FROM THE PETITIONER'S SHOP**| ||**EVIDENCING THE CAUSING OF HINDRANCE BY THE**| ||**AUTORIKSHAWS FOR THE PETITIONER'S CUSTOMERS**| |**EXHIBIT P5**|**PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE PETITION FIELD BY THE**| ||**PETITIONER'S HUSBAND DATED 10.06.2018**| |**EXHIBIT P6**|**PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 5TH**| ||**RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT**| |**EXHIBIT P7**|**PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE**| ||**PETITIONER'S HUSBAND BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT**| |**EXHIBIT P8**|**PHOTOCOPY OF THE LAST PETITION FILED BY THE**| ||**PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 DATED**| ||**8.8.2018**| |**EXHIBIT P9**|**PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT**| ||**IN WPC NO.2796/2005 DATED 2.2.2005**| |**EXHIBIT P10**|**PHOTOCOPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE**| ||**COURT IN WPC NO.5940/2018 DATED 06.04.2018**| |**EXHIBIT P11**|**ROUGH SKETCH OF THE ENTIRE DISPUTED AREA.**| |**EXHIBIT P12**|**PHOTOGRAPH EVIDENCING THE PARKING OF**| ||**AUTORICKSHAWS IN THE CAUSE WAY JUNCTION.**| |**EXHIBIT P13**|**PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE FIR REGISTERED BY**| ||**RESPONDENT NO.3 AGAINST THE HIGH HANDED ACTION**| ||**OF ONE OF THE AUTO RICKSHAW DRIVERS IN CRIME**| ||**NO. 1232/2018.**| WP(C).No.27707 OF 2018(K) 12 ## **RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT R5(A) THE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING DATED 1.7.2011 CONVENE AT THE MUNDAKAYAM PANCHAYAT CONFERENCE HALL.(TO ADDRESS THE TRAFFIC REGULATION IN MUNDAKAYAM TOWN). EXHIBIT R5(B) THE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF DECISION NO.XIV(3) FIXING THE AUTORICKSHAWS STAND IN MUNDAKAYAM TOWN. EXHIBIT R6A TRUE COPY OF THE PARKING PERMIT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH TO THE 6TH RESPONDENT BEARING NO.94. EXHIBIT R6B TRUE COPY OF THE PARKING PERMIT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH TO THE 7TH RESPONDENT BEARING NO.96. EXHIBIT R9A TRUE COPY OF THE PARKING PERMIT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH TO THE 9TH RESPONDENT WITH MGP NO.116. EXHIBIT R9 B TRUE COPY OF THE PARKING PERMIT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH TO THE 10TH RESPONDENT WITH MGP NO.104. EXHIBIT R9 C PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE MARKING PROVIDING ACCESS TO THE PETITIONERS AND NEAR BY SHOP. EXHIBIT R9(d) THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE ACCIDENT AND PARKING OF VEHICLE IN FRONT OF THE PETITIONER'S SHOP. EXHIBIT R9(e) TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, KOTTAYAM FOR ACCEPTING COMPLAINT DATED 8-10-2018.** //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE.