Disposed

Kider Muhammed v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC28 May 2012WP(C)/1342/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge Division Bench disposed of a writ petition filed by street vendors. The court held that since the draft policy was being implemented and the Supreme Court had given time until June 2012 for compliance, entertaining the petition at that stage was premature. Petitioners were directed to the earlier division bench judgment.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of without granting reliefs, as the stage is premature for entertaining the grievances.

Kider Muhammed Vs State of Kerala — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF MAY 2012/7TH JYAISHTA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 1342 of 2012 (P)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

KIDER MUHAMMED

¶8

S/O.ABDUL KAREEM, KADAVILPARAMBU, PONNARIMANGALAM MULAVUKAD.P.O.

¶9

ABDUL HAKEEM,, AGED 36 YEARS S/O.ABDUL RAHIM, KOTTARU, PONNARIMANGALAM MULAVUKAD.

¶10

RAJESH.K.P.,, AGED 36 YEARS KAVALLOOR HOUSE, AAKKANADU, MULAPPUZHA.P.O. PERUMBAVOOR.

¶11

SHAJIK.K.K, KADAVUNKAL HOUSE, VAZHAKKALA, KAKKANADU.

¶12

MOHAMMED SHAFI, S/O.MOHAMMED THAMEEM, PUTHUKOTTA HOUSE, V.C.STREET PUTHUNAGARAM, PALAKKAD.

¶13

RIYAS.K,, AGED 26 YEARS S/O.KHADER BASHEER, ERSALI HOUSE (UNNAMACHATHAN STREET), PUTHUNAGARAM.P.O. PALAKKAD.

¶14

SULAIMAN,, AGED 29 YEARS S/O.ABDULKHADER, V.P.HOUSE, VIRINJIPADAKULAM PUTHUNAGARAM.P.O., PALAKKAD.

¶15

SHAMSU.E.M,, AGED 38 YEARS EDASSERIKUNNEL HOUSE, N.A.D. P.O., ALUVA.

¶16

BASHEER.P.A.,, AGED 38 YEARS PUTHUKOTTE HOUSE, MULAVUKADU.P.O., PONNARIMANGALAM ERNAKULAM.

¶17

POULOSE.P.I,, AGED 55 YEARS PANIKULAM, NEDUVANNUR, CHOWARA.P.O. ALUVA.

¶18

KANI.S,

¶19

S/O.SINI, CHITTUR ROAD, MALABAR LODGE.

¶20

W.P.(C).1342/12

¶21

-2-

¶22

K.M.MUHAMMADALI, KARIPPURATH VEETTIL HOUSE, KALOOR, KOCHI-17.

¶23

SHAJAHAN.P.A,, AGED 28 YEARS PUTHUKATTUR HOUSE, PONNARIMANGALAM, MULAVUKAD.

¶24

RAHMATHULLA.P.A,, AGED 30 YEARS PACHA HOUSE, (U.C.STREET), PUTHUNAGARAM.P.O.

¶25

RAMSAN.P.A, PUCHA HOUSE U.C.STREET, PUTHUNAGARAM.P.O.

¶26

P.M.ABDUL RAHIM,, AGED 53 YEARS S/O.YUSUF, PALLATHUPARAMBU, PONJIKARA MULAVUKADU.

¶27

NIHAS.P.S, S/O.SIDDIQUE, PARAYAKULATHIL HOUSE KULAYITTIKKARA.P.O., KANJIRAMATTOM ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶28

MUHAMMED RAFEEQUE.K.A,, AGED 41 YEARS S/O.ABDUL AZEEZ, PALLATHUPARAMBU, PONJIKKARA MULAVUKADU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶29

ANWARUDDIN.K.S,, AGED 56 YEARS S/O.SHAMSUDDIN, DEENMANZIL HOUSE KANIYAVELI CROSS ROAD, CHALIKKAVATTOM, VENNALA.

¶30

AZZARUDDIN,, AGED 21 YEARS S/O.ANWARUDDIN.K.S, DEENMANZIL HOUSE KANIYAVELI CROSS ROAD, CHALIKKAVATTOM, VENNALA.

¶31

SAINUDHEEN.K,

¶32

S/O.KHALID, NADUVILPARAMBIL HOUSE, PONNARIMANGALAM MULAVUKAD.P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶33

THAJUMUDDIN.J, S/O.JALALUDDIN, ROADVILA VEEDU, VELIMON KUNDARA.P.O., PERINADU, KOLLAM.

¶34

M.D.SAYEED,, AGED 63 YEARS S/O.ALIHASSAN, KAMMAT LANE, T.D.ROAD ERNAKULAM, COCHIN.

¶35

MUHAMMED.M,, AGED 18 YEARS

¶36

S/O.MUHAMMED HANIFA, MADATHILPPARAMBIL HOUSE CHATDLIPADOM, E.VAYANASALA, ELAMAKKARA ERNAKULAM.

¶37

MALIK MUHAMMED,, AGED 34 YEARS S/O.SHAHUL HAMEED, VELLAKKADAPARAMBIL HOUSE ELAMAKKARA.P.O., ERNAKULAM.

¶38

W.P.(C).1342/12

¶39

-3-

¶40

SHAHUL HAMEED,, AGED 42 YEARS S/O.SHAMSUDDIN, NEDUMPILLICHALIL, CHALIKKAVATTOM VENNALA.P.O., ERNAKULAM.

¶41

AYOOB.K,, AGED 21 YEARS S/O.ABDUL KADER, NEDUMPILLICHALIL, CHALIKKAVATTOM VENNALA.P.O., ERNAKULAM.

¶42

C.K.BABU,, AGED 38 YEARS S/O.C.C.KONGEHAN, CHETTALATHI HOUSE, PERUMBALAM.P.O. CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶43

ROBIN.A,, AGED 32 YEARS S/O.AUGUSTINE.Y, VELLIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, NAGARMUDI SIVAN MALA ESTATE, MUNNAR.P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶44

AYYAPPAN.M,, AGED 34 YEARS S/O.MUTHU SAMY, ARRAIKA PARAMBIL HOUSE NADUKULAKARA MALA, KUSUMAGIRI.P.O., ATHANI KAKKANADU.

¶45

HANEEF A VAVA, PONNARIMANGALAM JETTY, MULAVUKAD.P.O., ERNAKULAM.

¶46

P.K.RAFEEK, KOTHERZHATTUPARAMBU HOUSE, PALLURUTHY.P.O. COCHIN-6.

¶47

MUMTHAS AHAMADHU, MEERAN BHAVAN, KAMMATH LINE, KOCHI-35.

¶48

FRANCIS.P.I,, AGED 47 YEARS S/O.ITTOOP, PANIKULAM HOUSE, NADUVANNUR CHOWWARA, ALUVA.

¶49

P.T.GEORGE,, AGED 55 YEARS S/O.THOMAS, PULIKKAD HOUSE, PARIYARAM.P.O. CHELAKUDI, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶50

ABDUL RAHIM.P.N,, AGED 66 YEARS PUTHUKOTTAKARA HOUSE, PONNARIMANGALAM.P.O. MULAVUKAD.

¶51

SHAKEER HUSSAIN,, AGED 32 YEARS PUTHUKOTTAI HOUSE, PONNARIMANGALAM.P.O., MULAVUKAD.

¶52

SIRAJUDHIN (SIKKANDER),, AGED 52 YEARS MANZIL HOUSE, THAMMANAM.P.O., CHAKKARAPARAMBU.

¶53

T.A.NOUSHAD,, AGED 54 YEARS THAIPARAMBIL HOUSE, POWER HOUSE WARD, ALAPPUZHA.

¶54

SOLAMAN.P.M,, AGED 54 YEARS PULIKKOTTIL HOUSE, VADUTHALA.

¶55

W.P.(C).1342/12

¶56

-4-

¶57

M.EBRAHIM,, AGED 52 YEARS C 43/2582, S/O.MOHAMMED, NOORMAHAL HOUSE PEEDIYAKKAL ROAD, S.R.M.ROAD, COCHIN-18.

¶58

ABDUL NAZAR,, AGED 33 YEARS

¶59

S/O.ABDUL RAHIM, PUTHUCOTTAR HOUSE, PONNARIMANGALAM MULAVUKAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶60

E.C.WILSON, S/O.CHAKKUNNI, EDAKKLATHUR, KIGINIMUDOM KOLENCHERI.

¶61

M.RIYASUDHIN,, AGED 40 YEARS KANNAMBILLY HOUSE, MULAVUKAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶62

M.MUHAMMED RAFI,, AGED 48 YEARS KANNAMBILLY HOUSE, MULAVUKAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶63

MANIKUTTAN,, AGED 42 YEARS S/O.KESAVAN, CHIRATHARA, CHEMBU.

¶64

VENU,, AGED 46 YEARS S/O.SARAVANAN, KANNAMPARAMBU HOUSE, CHULLIKKAL KOCHI-2.

¶65

ANVARUDHEEN,, AGED 57 YEARS S/O.ABDUL WAHIND, DOOR NO.8/102, AYYAPPANKAVU.

¶66

SHEIKH JAFAR ALI, AGED 44, S/O.SHEIK SOWKATHALI, 29, KARIKKAMURI MINISTRY ROAD, COCHIN-682 011.

¶67

MOHANAN, AGED 50, S/O.VASUDEVAN, NAMANAT VEEDU, PAYAKAD.P.O. PIN-688540.

¶68

BY ADVS.SMT.T.B.MINI

¶69

SRI.VICTOR ANTONY NOONE

¶70

RESPONDENT(S):

¶71

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695 001.

¶72

THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, KUDUMBASREE AND NODAL OFFICER, SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695 001.

¶73

CORPORATION OF COCHIN, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, BOAT JETTY ERNAKULAM.682 016.

¶74

THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, ERNAKULAM.682 016.

¶75

THE TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, COCHIN CORPORATION, ERNAKULAM.682 016.

¶76

BY ADV. SRI.JIBU P.THOMAS,SC,COCHIN CORPORATION

¶77

GP SRI.M.A.ABDUL SHUKOOR SRI.P.K.SOYUZ, FOR R3 AND 5

¶78

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28-05-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶79

W.P.(C).1342/12

¶80

APPENDIX

¶81

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS

¶82

EXHIBIT P1-TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER & JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.11897/2000. EXHIBIT P2-TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN SUPREME COURT IN GANINDA RAM'S CASE.

¶83

EXHIBIT P3-TRUE COPY OF THE NATIONAL POLICY ON URBAN STREET VENDORS 2009.

¶84

EXHIBIT P4-TRUE COPY OF THE STATE POLICY WITH DIRECTION IN G.O.MS.NO.90/2011 LS & SF DEPARTMENT DATED 30.4.2011.

¶85

EXHIBIT P5-TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF CONSTITUTION OF NAGARA KACHAVADA COMMITTEE DATED 30.4.2011.

¶86

EXHIBIT P6-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.39302/DC1/2004/LSGD DATED 12.5.2011 ISSUED BY UNDER SECRETARY ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT.

¶87

EXHIBIT P7-TRUE COPY OF THE ROUGH SKETCH OF POSITION THE PETITIONER'S DOING BUSINESS.

¶88

EXHIBIT P8-TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12.1.2012 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶89

/true copy/

¶90

P.A. To Judge

¶91

ANTONY DOMINIC, J

¶92

W.P.(C).1342/2012

¶93

.............................................. Dated this the 28^th day of May, 2012

¶94

JUDGMENT

¶95

The issue raised in this writ petition is covered by the judgments in W.P.(C).6952/2012 and 1869/2012. In the judgment in W.P.(C).1869/2012, it was held thus:-

¶96

“If there is any violation of the direction of the Apex Court, it is open to the petitioner to approach the Apex Court complaining such violation. On the other hand, when we notice, the draft policy is already prepared and it has to be implemented. We also note that the time granted to all the State Governments is upto the end of June, 2012. We are only in February. Therefore, we are of the opinion, the individual bunk owner can approach the concerned Court for necessary action, if he is aggrieved by the notice for removal of the bunk shop and we cannot entertain the writ petition to grant the reliefs sought in the writ petition at this stage as it is only a premature stage to look into the grievance of the petitioner.”

¶97

Therefore, clarifying that the petitioners will also be entitled to the benefit of the Division Bench judgment, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶98

ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge

¶99

mrcs

Kider Muhammed v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kider Muhammed v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A.N.Ramachandran Vs Chottanikkara Gramapanchayath

Abdul Russak Vs Pathanamthitta Municipality and Another

C.K. Thankappan Vs the State of Kerala

P.v.Damodara Poduval Vs Special Tahsildar La

Dr. Raju Vs the Koothattukulam Grama Panchayath

Baby Girija Vs State of Kerala