Allowed

Alex v. John v the District Police Chief

Kerala HC10 Jul 2018WP(C)/4191/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of a writ petition concerning difficult parking conditions faced by petitioners due to vehicles parked in front of their building. The Court directed the Panchayat to ensure a 5-foot gap between vehicles.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 3rd respondent Panchayat to ensure vehicles are parked in front of the building leaving a gap of 5 feet in between.

Alex v John Vs the District Police Chief — Municipal and Town Planning | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 19TH ASHADHA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 4191 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONERS :

¶7

1 ALEX V. JOHN, VALAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, TOWN KULATHUPUZHA, KOLLAM - 691 310.

¶8

2 SURESH V. JOHN, VALAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, TOWN KULATHUPUZHA, KOLLAM - 691 310.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.C.HARIKUMAR SRI.P.S.SIDHARTHAN SRI.RENJITH RAJAPPAN

¶10

RESPONDENTS :

¶11

1. THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, CONTONMENT P.O, KOLLAM 691 001.

¶12

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KULATHUPUZHA POLICE STATION, KULATHUPUZHA KOLLAM - 691 310.

¶13

3. THE SECRETARY, KULATHUPUZHA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KULATHUPUZHA, KOLLAM - 691 310.

¶14

4. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, P.W.D SECTION, ANCHAL KOLLAM - 691 306.

¶15

R1, R2 & R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MANURAJ K.J. R3 BY ADV. SRI.MANOJ RAMASWAMY,SC,KULATHUPUZHA GRAMA PANCHAYATH

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

¶18

WP(C).No. 4191 of 2018 (Y)

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶21

EXHIBIT P1 THE PHOTOGRAPHS EVIDENCING THE PARKING OF THE VEHICLE EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 14-06-2017 AND THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT INDICATING THE RECEIPT OF THE SAME EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14-06-2017 AND THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT INDICATING THE RECEIPT OF THE SAME EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P(C) NO.21319 OF 2016 DATED 1-7-2016

¶22

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

¶23

NIL

¶24

TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE

¶25

¶26

11.7.2018

¶27

SHAJI P. CHALY, J.

¶28

W.P.(C) No.4191 of 2018

¶29

Dated this the 10^th day of July, 2018

¶30

J U D G M E N T

¶31

According to the petitioners, they have constructed a building opposite to the Panchayat office at A.K. Road, Town ward of Kulathupuzha Panchayat and conducting business there. Apart from the business carried on by the petitioners, there are other shop keepers and a bank in the same building. Difficulties are faced by the petitioners as well as other occupants of the building consequent to the indiscreet parking of taxi and tempo traveller in front of the building. Thereupon, petitioners have preferred Ext.P2 before the Panchayat and Ext.P3 before the Sub Inspector of Police seeking appropriate action. Since the petitioners could not attain any fruitful results, this writ petition is filed seeking appropriate directions.

¶32

Panchayat has filed a statement basically submitting that, on receipt of Ext.P2 complaint strict instructions were

¶33

W.P.(C) No.4191 of 2018

¶34

¶35

given to the drivers of vehicles and accordingly vehicles are being parked maintaining sufficient gap in between the vehicles enabling the petitioners and others to access the building owned by the petitioners.

¶36

Having heard learned counsel for petitioners, learned Government Pleader as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 3^rd respondent Panchayat, I think it is only appropriate that, writ petition is disposed of with appropriate directions. In my considered opinion, the application submitted by the petitioners before the Panchayat as well as the Sub Inspector of Police is not a properly constituted one. Therefore, petitioners will be at liberty to file suitable applications before the authority under the Kerala Police Act and the Motor Vehicles Act and before the authority under the 3^rd respondent Panchayat. If any applications are made by the petitioners before the respective statutory authorities, appropriate action shall be taken in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioners

¶37

W.P.(C) No.4191 of 2018

¶38

¶39

and any other interested persons at the earliest. Till such time, there will be a direction to the 3^rd respondent Panchayat to ensure that, vehicles are parked in front of the building leaving a gap of 5 feet in between the vehicles. Parties will be guided by the orders so passed by any of the statutory authorities.

¶40

Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

smv 10.7.2018

Alex v. John v the District Police Chief

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alex v. John v the District Police Chief

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nazar M.A. Vs the Corporation of Kollam

Biju Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Balambika Alias Ambika M. Vs the District Collector

Hamsa.O.v. Vs the District Collector

St.George Jacobite Syrian Chapel Vs the District Collector, Ernakulam

I.P.Elias Vs the Piravom Municipality