Unais Basheer, Rasik K.I., Mahin T.A. v. Erattupetta Municipality and Others

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR** ## **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY** **MONDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 26TH PHALGUNA, 1941** **WP(C).No.34322 OF 2016(S)** ## **PETITIONER/S:** |**1**|**UNAIS BASHEER, THYPARAMBIL HOUSE, ERATTUPETTA**| |---|---| ||**P.O.,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 502.**| |**2**|**RASIK K.I., KADAPLACKAL HOUSE, NADACKAL**| ||**P.O.,ERATTUPETTA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 502.**| |**3**|**MAHIN T.A., THYPARAMBIL HOUSE, ERATTUPETTA**| ||**P.O.,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 502.**| ||**BY ADV. SRI.S.JIJI**| ## **RESPONDENT/S:** - **1 THE ERATTUPETTA MUNICIPALITY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,ERATTUPETTA P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,PIN - 686 502.** - **2 THE CHAIRMAN, ERATTUPETTA MUNICIPALITY, ERATTUPETTA P.O.,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 502.** - **ADDL. ADV. V.P. NAZAR, S/O V.K.PAREETH, AGED 39 R3 YEARS, VELLUPARAMBIL, NADAKAL P.O., ERATTUPETTA.** - **ADDL. ANVAR ALIAR, AGED 29 YEARS R4 S/O LATE PK ALIYAR, PUTHENPEEDIKAYIL MARKET ROAD, ERATTUPETTA.** WP(C).No.34322 OF 2016(S) ..2.. |**ADDL.**|**V.M.SIRAJ, AGED 39 YEARS**| |---|---| |**R5**|**S/O MUHAMMED, VETTICKAL HOUSE, NADACKAL P.O.,**| ||**ERATTUPETTA.**| |**ADDL.**|**NIZAR KURBANI, S/O MUHAMMED KHAN, AGED 58**| |**R6**|**YEARS, VALIYAVEETTIL, NADACKAL P.O.,**| ||**ERATTUPETTA.**| |**ADDL.**|**ABDUL BASITH, S/O PAREETH KHAN, AGED 34 YEARS,**| |**R7**|**CHAIPARAMBIL, NADACKAL P.O., ERATTUPETTA.**| |**ADDL.**|**P.M ABDUL KHADER, S/O PA MOHAMMED, AGED 58**| |**R8**|**YEARS, PUTHUPARAMBIL, NADACKAL P.O.,**| ||**ERATTUPETTA.**| |**ADDL.**|**K.P MUJEEB, S/O PAREED RAWTHER, AGED 42 YEARS,**| |**R9**|**KALLUPURAKAL, THEKEKARA, ERATTUPETTA.**| |**ADDL.**|**BEEMA NASAR, W/O NASAR VK, AGED 31 YEARS,**| |**R10**|**VAZHAMATTAM, KADUVAMUZHY, ERATTUPETTA.**| |**ADDL.**|**FATHIMA ANSARI, W/O ANSARI PH, AGED 25 YEARS,**| |**R11**|**PULLOLIL HOUSE, THEKEKARA, ERATTUPETTA.**| |**ADDL.**|**RAFI ABDULKHADER, W/O ABDUL KHADER, AGED 43**| |**R12**|**YEARS, KANNAMPARAMBIL, NADACKAL P.O.,**| ||**ERATTUPETTA.**| |**ADDL.**|**SHAHUBANATH K.A, W/O MUHAMMED MH, AGED 43**| |**R13**|**YEARS, MOOLACHALIL, NADACKAL P.O.,**| ||**ERATTUPETTA.**| ||**_ADDL.R3-R13 ARE IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DATED_**| ||**_06.01.2017 IN IA NO.18625/2016_**| ||**R1 BY ADV. SRI.V.K.MOHAMMED YOUSUF**| ||**R1, R3-13 BY ADV. SRI.V.K.PEERMOHAMED KHAN**| ||**R2 BY ADV. SHRI.V.K.MOHAMMED YOUSEF, SC,**| ||**ERATTUPETTA MUNICIPALITY**| **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** WP(C).No.34322 OF 2016(S) ..3.. ## **J U D G M E N T** ## S.Manikumar, CJ. Instant Public Interest Litigation is filed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider Exts.P2 and P3 representations and to take immediate steps for the removal of the platform namely 'Ahmed Kurikkal Nagar' situated at causeway junction, Erattupetta within a time limit. 2. Petitioners have also sought for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to install platforms in the public road and road margin and to ensure that no public meetings are held at causeway junction, Erattupetta. ## 3. Facts leading to the instant Public Interest Litigation are as ## follows; “2. The Erattupetta is a growing town situated at the starting point of high range region. The major highways as well as PWD roads coming from Kottayam, Thodupuzha, Kanjirapilly, Vagamon and Poonjar are merging at Erattupetta. The numbers of vehicles passing through these major roads are increasing day by day. In order to control the heavy traffic, double line method is introduced in the roads in the town. Even after the introduction of these possible traffic arrangements, traffic block and motor accidents are common events at this area. 3. The public platform, namely 'Ahmed Kurikkal Nagar' was WP(C).No.34322 OF 2016(S) ..4.. constructed long ago by the Municipality during while there were very limited motor traffic in these roads. These platform is situated at causeway junction, in the center of Vagamon road and market road. Apart from these roads, the causeway road and two roads to the Pulickal Tower and Shopping Complex are also merging together in this causeway junction. There is the distance of around 50 meters from the causeway junction to the central junction of Erattupetta as well as to the private bus stand. While, public meetings are held, the people are crowded in the above public roads, block in the movements of all vehicles. **The true photographs showing the traffic congestion in front of the** ” **platform** is produced herewith and marked as **Exhibit P1** . 4. Projecting the grievance that the location of the public platform causes traffic congestion and obstruction, Exts.P2 and P3 representations dated 30.08.2016 and 19.09.2016 respectively have been submitted before the Chairman, Erattupetta Municipality - 2[nd] respondent. Reliance has also been filed on a decision of this Court in **Khalid Mundappilly** v. **The Executive Engineer & Others** [2010 (3) ILR Kerala Series Page 84], which is produced as Ext.P4. Contending that Exts.P2 & P3 representations remain unanswered, instant Public Interest Litigation has been filed for the reliefs stated supra, on the following grounds: “A. The respondents are duty bound to act upon the Ext.P2 and P3 representations and to take favourable action for the removal of the public platform which is situated in the main cause way WP(C).No.34322 OF 2016(S) ..5.. junction in Erattupetta in the name 'Ahmed Kurikkal Nagar' which is creating severe traffic congestion in the area and which has proved to be of great havoc to the commuters and the shop owners nearby and which has over time transformed into a public nuisance and threat to freedom of movement of the people as well as vehicles. B. The continuation of giving permission to conduct public meetings in the public platform is leading to wide spread traffic congestion and proves to be of great threat to business around the area. The very act of the respondents were by giving permission to conduct public meetings are against the ration set by this honourable court in Ext.P4 judgment. In fact, the nonremoval of the above platform amounts to violations of directions of this honourable court in Ext.P4 judgment and also liable to proceeded under the Contempt of Court Act. C. The conducting of public meeting and the public platform in itself is proving to be of great threat to the right for fee movement as well as the right for trade and business and violates the rights guarantee under the articles 19(1)(a) & (g) and extended to the right to life guaranteed under article 21 of the constitution of India. D. The respondents are not ready to act upon the above mentioned Ext.P2 and Ext P3 knowing fully well the above mentioned facts and it is also apprehended by the petitioners that the respondents will not take action on Exts.P2 and P3 without an interference from this honourable court.” ## 5. A counter affidavit has been filed by the Chairman, Erattupetta Municipality, wherein it is contended as follows: “3. It is humbly submitted that the platform named Ahmad Kurikkal Nagar has made years back in the name of erstwhile WP(C).No.34322 OF 2016(S) ..6.. Local Administration Minister of Kerala who has made several developments in the state of Kerala and in Erattupetta Grama Panchayat. The Platform named Ahmed Kurikkal Nagar is situated at causeway Junction Erattupetta. At the time of construction of above said platform Erattupetta was a Grama Panchaaayat, not so much developed and was not a busy town and even the cause way road came after that. 4. There is no hindrance or obstruction to the travelling public due to the existence of platform named Ahmed Kurikkal Nagar. In the said platform so many public meetings were held from time immemorial. There may be crowd around the platform while conducting public meetings. 5. This respondent have taken steps not to conduct any public meeting here. The platform will not be used for public meetings so as to make hindrance for the traffic. 6. Alternative arrangements are being made by the respondents to make a podium for the conduct of public meeting in another convenient location within the Municipal area 7. This respondent has taken a decision to beautify this area by making Ahmad Kurikkal square and also decided to make a clock tower in the name of late Ahmad Kurikkal erstwhile minister in the place of above said Platform. 8. It is humbly submitted that, the Municipality has resolved to take steps to make a clock tower there as in the name Ahmad Kurikkal square, on withdrawal of the case pending in respect of the above subject. The above decision has been approved as resolution No.15/15 dated 11/12/2019 against the Agenda No. 15 in the ordinary meeting of Erattupetta Municipality held on 11/12/2019 regarding the construction of clock tower in the Ahmad Kurikkal Nagar situated in Ward No.20 of the Municipality. 9. Another decision has been approved as per resolution No.15/15 WP(C).No.34322 OF 2016(S) ..7.. in ordinary meeting held on 24/1/2020 that the Counsellors approved the construction of clock tower in the Ahmad Kurikkal Nagar against the agenda No.15, on the basis of the letter given by Chairman to include in the Agenda of the meeting for the construction of clock tower in Ahmad Kurikkal Nagar situated in Division No. 20 of the Municipality – Engineering division Erattupetta Municipality. 10. It is respectfully submitted that it has been decided by the Municipality to make a square in the name of Ahmad Kurikkal and to install a clock tower in the place of the Platform named Ahmad Kurikkal Nagar.” 6. On 07.02.2020, when the matter came up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Municipality, on instructions, submitted that the respondent Municipality is ready to remove the platform and after the removal of the said platform, the area would be beautified. 7. On this day, when the matter came up for further hearing, submissions have been made by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Municipality on the basis of the counter affidavit dated 13.02.2020, which is reproduced above. 8. Inasmuch as the Erattupetta Municipality has come forward to remove the public platform and to install a clock tower in the name of Ahmad Kurikkal, there is no need to grant the first prayer in the writ petition. Second prayer in the writ petition, i.e., to issue a writ of WP(C).No.34322 OF 2016(S) **==> picture [20 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** mandamus directing the respondents not to install platforms in the public road and road margin and to ensure that no public meetings are held at causeway junction, Erattupetta, is an omnibus prayer, which cannot be granted. However, it is made clear that it is for the municipal authorities to have due regard to the provisions of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, 2011. Accordingly, instant writ petition is disposed of. ## **Sd/-** **S.MANIKUMAR** **CHIEF JUSTICE** ## **Sd/-** **SHAJI P.CHALY** **JUDGE** Bka/17.03.2020 WP(C).No.34322 OF 2016(S) ..9.. ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 34322/2016** **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS (2 NOS) EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 19.9.2016 FILED BY THE SHOP OWNERS AT ERATTUPETTA BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 30.8.2016 BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** **EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 23.6.2010 IN WPC NO. 19253/2010.**