Partly allowed

Abdulla v. the Regional Transport Officer

Kerala HC13 Jul 2022WP(C)/2057/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of three connected writ petitions. The court quashed a decision by the Traffic Regulatory Committee for fixing a halting place because it failed to follow mandatory procedures under the Panchayat Raj Rules, 1995, and did not hear affected parties. The court directed the committee to reconsider the matter after providing a hearing.

What did the court decide?

Ext.P3 is quashed; the Traffic Regulatory Committee is directed to reconsider the matter after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.

Abdulla Vs the Regional Transport Officer — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 22ND ASHADHA, 1944

¶3

WP(C) NO. 16648 OF 2021

¶4

PETITIONER/S:

¶5

1 ABDULLA, AGED 55 YEARS S/O. MOOSA, POYILIL HOUSE, KAYYELIKUNNU, RAROTH VILLAGE, VEZHPOOR DESOM, THAMARASSERY P.O., KOZHIKODE-673573.

¶6

2 MUJEEB, AGED 46 YEARS S/O. MUHAMMED, AMNALAKKUNNU HOUSE, KOODATHAYI VILLAGE, THAMARASSERY TALUK, KOZHIKODE-673573. BY ADVS.

¶7

A.RANJITH NARAYANAN C.T.AHAMMEDKUTTY

¶8

A.SIMI

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶11

2 THE TRAFFIC REGULATORY COMMITTEE, OMASSERY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN (THROUGH HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SECRETARY, OMASSERY PANCHAYAT) OFFICE OF THE TRAFFIC REGULATORY COMMITTEE, OMASSERY GRAMA PANCHAYATH OFFICE, OMASSERY, KOZHIKODE-673572.

¶12

3 THE OMASSERY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OMASSERY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, OMASSERY POST, KOZHIKODE-673572.

¶13

4 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE-673020.

¶14

5 THE JOINT RTO (KODUVALLY), OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KODUVALLY, P.O.KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE-673572.

¶15

6 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KODENCHERY POLICE STATION, P.O.KODENCHERY, KOZHIKODE-679335.

¶16

-2-

¶17

W.P.(C) Nos. 2057, 8679 & 16648 of 2021

¶18

7 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE-673020.

¶19

8 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF (COMMISSIONER OF POLICE), KOZHIKODE, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONERATE OF POLICE, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE.

¶20

9 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (HIGHWAYS), OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER AND HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, ERANHIPALAM, KOZHIKODE-673020. BY ADVS. VINOD SINGH CHERIYAN T.M.KHALID K.P.SUSMITHA

¶21

OTHER PRESENT:

¶22

SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN, SR.GP

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 13.07.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).2057/2021,
8679/2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶24

W.P.(C) Nos. 2057, 8679 & 16648 of 2021

¶25

-3-

¶26

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶27

PRESENT

¶28

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 22ND ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 2057 OF 2021

¶29

PETITIONER/S:

¶30

ABDULLA, AGED 55 YEARS
S/O.MOOSA, POYILLIL HOUSE, KAYYELIKUNNU RAROOTH
VILLAGE, VEZHPOOR DESOM, THAMARASSERY P.O.,
KOZHIKODE 673 573
BY ADVS.
A.RANJITH NARAYANAN
SMT.A.SIMI

¶31

RESPONDENT/S:

¶32

1 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE 673 020

¶33

2 THE JOINT RTO (KODUVALLY) OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KODUVALLY, P.O.KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE 673 572

¶34

3 THE OMASSERY GRAM PANCHAYATH SECRETARY, OMASSERY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, OMASSERY POST, KOZHIKODE 673 572

¶35

4 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KODENCHERY POLICE STATION, KODENCHERY, KOZHIKODE 679 335

¶36

5 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE 673 020

¶37

6 SAJEEVAN AGED 30 YEARS S/O.CHATHOMAN, KAKKATTUKUNNU HOUSE, KOODATHAI BAZAR POST, KOZHIKODE 673 573

¶38

W.P.(C) Nos. 2057, 8679 & 16648 of 2021

¶39

-4-

¶40

7MOYI
AGED 40 YEARS
S/O.AHAMMED, POOVOTTIL HOUSE, KOODATHAI BAZAR
POST, KOZHIKODE 673 573
8ASHRAF
AGED 42 YEARS
S/O.ABOOBACKER, KAYYELIKKAL HOUSE, KOODATHAI
BAZAR, KOZHIKODE 673 573
9YOOSUF
AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
S/O.ABOOBACKER, KAYYELIKKAL HOUSE, KOODATHAI
BAZAR, KOZHIKODE 673 573
BY ADVS.
SRI.VINOD SINGH CHERIYAN
SRI.JUSTINE JACOB
SRI.K.S.ARUN KUMAR
SRI.T.M.KHALID
SMT.K.P.SUSMITHA
SMT.BINDU MOHAN
SMT.AMRUTHA P S
SMT.AMRUTHA K P

¶41

OTHER PRESENT:

¶42

SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN, SR.GP

¶43

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 13.07.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).16648/2021 AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶44

W.P.(C) Nos. 2057, 8679 & 16648 of 2021

¶45

-5-

¶46

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶47

PRESENT

¶48

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶49

WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 22ND ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 8679 OF 2021

¶50

PETITIONER/S:

¶51

MUJEEB, AGED 46 YEARS
S/O.MUHAMMED, AMNALAKKUNNU HOUSE, KOODATHAYI
VILLAGE, THAMARASSERY TALUK, KOZHIKODE - 673
573.

¶52

BY ADVS.
A.RANJITH NARAYANAN
SRI.C.T.AHAMMEDKUTTY
SMT.A.SIMI

¶53

RESPONDENT/S:

¶54

1 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE - 673 020.

¶55

2 THE JOINT RTO (KODUVALLY) OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KODUVALLY, P.O.KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE - 673 572.

¶56

3 THE OMASSERY GRAM PANCHAYATH SECRETARY, OMASSERY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, OMASSERY POST, KOZHIKODE - 673 572.

¶57

4 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KODENCHERY POLICE STATION, P.O.KODENCHERY, KOZHIKODE - 679 335. BY ADVS. VINOD SINGH CHERIYAN T.M.KHALID K.P.SUSMITHA

¶58

OTHER PRESENT:

¶59

SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN, SR.GP

¶60

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 13.07.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).16648/2021 AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶61

-6-

¶62

W.P.(C) Nos. 2057, 8679 & 16648 of 2021

¶63

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

¶64

W.P.(C) Nos. 2057, 8679 & 16648 of 2021

¶65

Dated this the 13^th day of July, 2022

¶66

JUDGMENT

¶67

All these writ petitions are connected and therefore, I am

¶68

disposing of these writ petitions by a common judgment. I will narrate the facts in WP(C) No.16648 of 2021 first. The prayers in WP(C) No.16648 of 2021 is extracted here:

¶69

“a. To issue a writ of Certiorari, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, calling for the original of Exhibit P 3 decision/order dated 30.06.2021 passed in the minutes of the Traffic Regulatory Committee of Omassery Panchayat, Kozhikode district, peruse the same and to quash and set it aside.

¶70

b. To declare and hold that the Traffic regulatory Committee constituted under S. 72 of the KP Act, 2011 does not have the jurisdiction or power to pass an order fixing a halting place/vehicle stand.

¶71

c. To declare and hold that the power and jurisdiction to provide public landing places, halting places, cart stands or other vehicle stands in a Panchayat in the State of Kerala vests with the authority under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Motor Vehicles Rules (Kerala), 1989, in consultation with the concerned authority of the

¶72

-7-

¶73

W.P.(C) Nos. 2057, 8679 & 16648 of 2021

¶74

Panchayat and with the Panchayat under S. 227 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and the mode and method of such providing of halting places shall only be as provided under Rules 3 to 8 of the Panchayat Raj (Landing Places, Halting Places, Cart Stands and Other Vehicle Stands) Rules, 1995 (Kerala).

¶75

d. To command by way of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to consider the issue afresh in strict compliance ofthe directions and propositions of law laid down in the judicial pronouncements made by this Honourable Court in 2019 (2) KHC 562, 2014 (1) KHC 317, 1996 (2) KLT 490, 1978 KLT 813 and other dictums and thus comply with the statutory provisions under the M V Act, 1988 and Kerala Rules, 1989, Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, Panchayat Raj (Landing Places, Halting Places, Cart Stands and Other Vehicle Stands) Rules, 1995 (Kerala) and the Kerala Police Act, 2011 and to pass such other appropriate order, or take appropriate action in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to these petitioners.

¶76

e. To order costs of this proceedings from the respondents.

¶77

f. To grant such other remedy/remedies prayed for by the petitioner from time to time and which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper to grant in the interests of justice.

¶78

W.P.(C) Nos. 2057, 8679 & 16648 of 2021

¶79

-8-

¶80

g. To effectively mould the remedy and grant such moulded relief/reliefs as the interest of justice call for.” (sic)

¶81

The petitioners are challenging Ext.P3 decision

¶82

dated 30.06.2021 passed in the minutes of the Traffic Regulatory Committee of Omassery Panchayat, Kozhikode. According to the petitioner, the Traffic Regulatory Committee constituted under Section.72 of the Kerala Police Act, does not have jurisdiction or power to pass an order fixing halting place or vehicle stand. It is the case of the petitioner that the power and jurisdiction to provide public landing places, halting places, cart stands or other vehicle stands in a Panchayat in the State of Kerala vests with the authority under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Motor Vehicles Rules (Kerala), 1989, in consultation with the concerned authority of the Panchayat and with the Panchayat under section 227 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and the mode and method of such providing of halting places shall only be as provided under Rules 3 to 8 of

¶83

W.P.(C) Nos. 2057, 8679 & 16648 of 2021

¶84

-9-

¶85

the Panchayat Raj (Landing Places, Halting Places, Cart Stands and Other Vehicle Stands) Rules, 1995 (Kerala). The counsel also submitted that even if the Traffic Regulatory Committee constituted under Sec.72 of the Kerala Police Act, has jurisdiction, the procedure should be followed as per Rules 3 to 8 of the Panchayat Raj (Landing Places, Halting Places, Cart Stands and Other Vehicle Stands) Rules, 1995 (Kerala).

¶86

The other two writ petitions (WP(C)Nos.2057 & 8679 of 2022) are filed to remove unauthorized parking of autorickshaws in front of the petitioner’s building denying their right to highway access.

¶87

Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the counsel appearing for the Panchayat. I also heard the learned Government Pleader also.

¶88

I perused Ext.P3 order passed by the Traffic Regulatory Committee. A perusal of Ext.P3 would show that

¶89

W.P.(C) Nos. 2057, 8679 & 16648 of 2021

¶90

-10-

¶91

the Traffic Regulatory Committee has not followed the procedure prescribed in Rules 3 to 8 of the Panchayat Raj (Landing Places, Halting Places, Cart Stands and Other Vehicle Stands) Rules, 1995 (Kerala). When the rules specifically laid down certain procedure, it is the duty of the authority to follow the same before declaring the place as halting space. For that simple reason itself, according to me, Ext.P3 can be set aside. Rules 3 to 8 of the Panchayat Raj (Landing Places, Halting Places, Cart Stands and Other Vehicle Stands) Rules, 1995 (Kerala) are extracted hereunder:

¶92

“ 3. Panchayat to invite objections before providing public landing places, halting places, cart stands or other vehicle stands.- (1) A Village Panchayat shall, if it intends to provide any public landing place, halting place, cart stand or other vehicle stand, publish a notice in the notice board of the Village Panchayat and in any prominent place in each of its constituencies requiring the public to raise objections regarding the same, if any, in writing within thirty days and publish the fact of such publication of notice in any two local daily newspapers in the regional language having wide circulation in that Village Panchayat.

¶93

-11-

¶94

W.P.(C) Nos. 2057, 8679 & 16648 of 2021

¶95

(2) The notice shall contain the survey number and the extent of the land in which it is intended to provide the landing place, halting place, cart stand, or other vehicle stand.

¶96

4. Village Panchayat to consider the objections. The Village Panchayat shall, in cases where the approval of Regional Transport Authority is not required, consider the objections received from the public within the fixed day and dispose them within fifteen days.

¶97

5. Village Panchayat to obtain previous sanction of the Regional Transport Authority -The Village Panchayat shall obtain previous sanction or the Regional Transport Authority before opening any public stand of halting place to motor vehicles.

¶98

6. Places which shall not be declared as halting places or cart stands. - A road or land abutting the road shall not ordinarily be declared as public halting place or cart stand.

¶99

Provided that in particular cases, if it is of opinion that there is sufficient space for road, a halting place or cart stand may be provided in consultation with the authority with whom the road is vested.

¶100

7. Other places not to be used as public landing place, halting place or cart stand when such places are provided for.- A Village Panchayat may, if it has provided public landing place, halting place or cart stand, prohibit within a distance fixed by it, using of any

¶101

-12-

¶102

W.P.(C) Nos. 2057, 8679 & 16648 of 2021

¶103

public place or side of public road by any person for the same purpose.

¶104

Provided that nothing contained in this rule shall apply to a motor vehicles [other than a stage carriage coming within the meaning of the Motor Vehicles] Act, 1988 (Central Act 59 of 1988)

¶105

Explanation. -A public place or the sides of a public road shall not be deemed to be used [as a public halting place or cart stand if a vehicle used] for the carriage of passengers stops there for a time not exceeding two minutes for the purpose of getting down or picking up passengers or their luggage or if a vehicle used for the carriage of goods stops there only for the time required for the loading and unloading of goods.

¶106

8. Publication of notice regarding providing of landing place, halting place and cart stand.- The Village Panchayat shall, if provides a landing place, halting place, or cart stand, publish the fact of such providing including the location of its opening and the rate of fee to be paid for its use, in important places of the Village Panchayat area and in the notice board of the Village Panchayat. A notice, specifying the rate prescribed by the Village Panchayat including the details of the name of the person authorised to collect the fee and the distance within which opening of another public cart stand or similar place is prohibited, shall be affixed in a notice board conspicuously placed in public landing places, halting places and cart stands.

¶107

W.P.(C) Nos. 2057, 8679 & 16648 of 2021

¶108

-13-

¶109

It is clear that the procedures prescribed in the rules

¶110

have not been followed by the Traffic Regulatory Committee, while allotting the place as halting space. It is true that the Traffic Regulatory Committee is competent to regulate traffic, which will include power to demarcate the parking place of autorickshaws and auto taxi. But the Committee cannot unilaterally declare a place as auto parking place. The Committee should hear the affected parties before taking such decisions. Petitioners are affected parties. They were not properly heard before taking Ext.P3 decision. Therefore, the matter has to be reconsidered by the Traffic Regulatory Committee – the 2^nd respondent in WP(C) No.16648 of 2021. As far as WP(C) Nos.2057 & 8679 of 2021 are concerned, the petitioners are shop owners. The official respondents are duty bound to see that no obstruction is created in front of their shop rooms by parking any autorickshaw, till a final decision is taken by the Traffic Regulatory Authority.

¶111

W.P.(C) Nos. 2057, 8679 & 16648 of 2021

¶112

-14-

¶113

Therefore, these three writ petitions are disposed of in the following manner:

¶114

Ext.P3 in WP(C) No.16648 of 2021 is quashed. The 2^nd respondent in this writ petition is directed to reconsider the matter, in accordance to law.

¶115

Before passing final orders by the Traffic Regulatory Committee will give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners in these writ petitions.

¶116

There will be a direction to the 4^th respondent in WP(C) Nos.2057 & 8679 of 2021 to see that there is no unauthorized parking of autorickshaws, in front of the petitioners’ building and through the way leading to the petitioners’ shop rooms, in these writ petitions, till the Traffic Regulatory Committee decide the matter finally.

¶117

sd/-

¶118

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

¶119

das

¶120

-15-

¶121

W.P.(C) Nos. 2057, 8679 & 16648 of 2021

¶122

¶123

`PETITION`	`ER EXH`	`IBITS`
`EXHIBIT`	`P1`	`TRUE COPY OF THE JENM ASSIGNMENT DEED` `DATED 18/3/2017 ALONG WITH ITS FORM` `NO.1B`
`EXHIBIT`	`P2`	`TRUE COPY OF THE SITE PLAN OF THE` `BUILDING SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD` `RESPONDENT ALONG WITH THE PLANS FOR` `THE PROPOSED SHOP BUILDING.`
`EXHIBIT`	`P3`	`TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT DATED` `9/12/2016`
`EXHIBIT`	`P4`	`TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX RECEIPT` `NO.42 DATED 16/9/2019`
`EXHIBIT`	`P5`	`TRUE COY OF THE RECEIPT DATED` `30.1.2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD` `RESPONDENT.`
`EXHIBIT`	`P6`	`TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX RECEIPT` `NO.44 DATED 16/9/2019`
`EXHIBIT`	`P7`	`TRUE COY OF THE REQUISITION DATED` `18.9.2019 UNDER THE RTI.`
`EXHIBIT`	`P8`	`TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 4/10/2019` `UNDER THE RTI ACT ISSUED BY THE PUBLIC` `INFORMATION OFFICER OF THE 3RD` `RESPONDENT.`
`EXHIBIT`	`P9`	`TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED` `6/1/2021`

¶124

-16-

¶125

W.P.(C) Nos. 2057, 8679 & 16648 of 2021

¶126

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8679/2021

¶127

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1THE TRUE COPY OF THE JENM ASSIGNMENT
DEED DATED 15/11/2014.
EXHIBIT P2THE TRUE COPY OF THE JENM ASSIGNMENT
DEED DATED 08/09/2015.
EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
18/04/2018.
EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF ITS RECEIPT DATED
18/04/2018.
EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
25/03/2021.

¶128

-17-

¶129

W.P.(C) Nos. 2057, 8679 & 16648 of 2021

¶130

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16648/2021

¶131

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1THE TRUE COPY OF INTERIM ORDER DATED
18.6.2021 IN WP(C) NOS.2057/2021 AND
8679/2021.
Exhibit P2THE TRUE COPY OF COUNTER AFFIDAVIT
DATED 5.7.2021 FILED IN WP(C)
NO.8679/2021.
Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES DATED
30.6.2021 OF THE TRAFFIC REGULATORY
COMMITTEE.
Exhibit P4PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING ILLEGAL AUTO
PARKING IN FRONT OF 1ST PETITIONER'S
BUILDING.
Exhibit P5PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING ROAD MARGIN AND
AVAILABLE SPACES TOWARDS THAMARASSERY
SIDE.
Exhibit P6PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING AVAILABLE PARKING
PLACE TOWARDS OMASSERY SIDE.

Abdulla v. the Regional Transport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdulla v. the Regional Transport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammed Musthafa A.K Vs Perinthalmanna Municipality

Mary Stephen, Vs State of Kerala

Mary Jomol K.J., Vs Ezhupunna Grama Panchayath

Salim T.A. Vs C.G.D.A.

C.v.Abraham Vs the District Panchayath

C.v.Abraham Vs the District Panchayat