Disposed

Ravi.C v. the Purathur Grama Panchayath

Kerala HC22 Jul 2022WP(C)/7736/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a petition by autorickshaw drivers challenging a decision to shift their parking stands. It directed the Traffic Regulatory Committee to reconsider the order after hearing all stakeholders and conducting a site inspection, while the original order remained temporarily in force.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Traffic Regulatory Committee to place fresh representations before it, consider them after hearing all parties and conducting a site inspection, and pass a fresh decision within two m

Ravi.C Vs the Purathur Grama Panchayath — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JULY 2022 / 31ST ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 7736 OF 2022

¶5

PETITIONERS:

¶6

1 RAVI.C S/O. SANKARAN, CHEMBRA HOUSE, PUTHUPPALLY P.O, MALAPPURAM 676 102

¶7

2 AYOOB S/O. MOHAMMEDKUTTY, THOTTUNGAL HOUSE, MUTTANNOR P.O, MALAPPURAM 676 561

¶8

3 ABDUL KAREEM, S/O. MUHAMMEDKUTTY, MULAKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PURATHUR P.O, MALAPPURAM-676102

¶9

4 KOYA S/O. MUHAMMED, KOLLEKATTI, PUTHUPPALLY P.O, MALAPPURAM 676 102

¶10

5 AYOOB K S/O. HAMZA, KOJINIKKANAKATH HOUSE, PURATHUR P.O, MALAPPURAM 676 102

¶11

BY ADV K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 THE PURATHUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH PURATHUR P.O, MALAPPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MALAPPURAM 676 102

¶14

2 TRAFFIC REGULATORY COMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN, PURATHUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PURATHUR P.O, MALAPPURAM 676 102

¶15

3 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY MALAPPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, UP HILL POST, MALAPPURAM 676 505

¶16

4 MAJEED,AGED 23 YEARS S/O. LATE KHASIM HAJI, MANAL PARAMBIL HOUSE, KAVILAKKADU, PURATHUR P.O, MALAPPURAM 676 102

¶17

BY SHRI.MANOJ RAMASWAMY, SC, PURATHUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
22.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P.(C) 7736/2022

JUDGMENT

The petitioners are autorickshaw drivers operating in the 1^st respondent Panchayath having halting place at Kavilakkad Angadi. According to them, they were parking their vehicles at Kavilakkad Angadi from 1986 onwards without causing any obstruction or nuisance to the public. The 4^th respondent, who owns a shopping complex at Kavilakkad Angadi approached this Court by filing W.P. (C) No.18408 of 2019 alleging that the members of the 4^th respondent union therein (CITU Auto Workers Union, Purathur Unit) are parking their autorickshaws illegally in front of his shopping complex without any sanction by the 1^st respondent Panchayath. This Court, by judgment dated 01.10.2019, disposed of the said writ petition directing the Purathur Grama Panchayath and its Secretary to act in terms the law declared by a Division Bench of this Court in Noushad.M. v . State of Kerala and others (2019 (2) KHC 562), and take appropriate decision as to the parking of the autorickshaws owned by the members of the aforesaid trade union, after hearing all sides. Pursuant to the said judgment, the 2^nd respondent, the Traffic

¶23

W.P.(C) 7736/2022

¶24

¶25

Regulatory Committee constituted in Purathur Grama Panchayath, after hearing the 4^th respondent and the representatives of the aforesaid trade union, passed Ext.P3 decision whereby the parking place of autorickshaws at Kavilakkad Angadi was shifted. As per Ext. P3, there cannot be any parking of autorickshaws in Purathur road between the 2^nd electric post from Kavilakkad junction and the bus stop. According to the petitioners, the shifting of the auto stand from Kavilakkad Angadi is causing considerable hardships and inconvenience to the autorickshaw drivers, the passengers and the general public.

¶26

Smt. Chitra, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Ext.P3 decision was taken by the Traffic Regulatory Committee after hearing the representatives of only one trade union and without hearing the petitioners and others who are really affected. It is submitted that the aforesaid trade union does not represent the cross section of the autorickshaw drivers in the Panchayath. It is further contended that Ext.P3 decision was taken contrary to the provisions of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The learned counsel also submits that Ext.P3 decision was

¶27

W.P.(C) 7736/2022

¶28

¶29

taken in January, 2020 and the pedestrian and vehicular traffic have since changed and Ext.P3 requires reconsideration in the changed situation. Though the petitioners preferred Ext.P5 representation before the President of the Panchayath, who is the Chairman of the Traffic Regulatory Committee, no steps have been taken on the said representation. The prayer of the petitioners in this writ petition is for a direction to the 2^nd respondent to re-consider Ext.P3 decision and to take a fresh decision on Ext.P5.

¶30

I have heard the learned standing counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Government Pleader for the 3^rd respondent. Though notice was served on the 4^th respondent, there is no appearance.

¶31

This Court, by judgment dated 01.10.2019 in W.P.(C) No.18408 of 2019, directed the Purathur Grama Panchayath and its Secretary to act in terms the law declared by this Court in Noushad (supra) and to take appropriate decision as to the parking of the autorickshaws owned by the members of the aforesaid trade union, after hearing all sides. The Traffic Regulatory Committee, in exercise

¶32

W.P.(C) 7736/2022

¶33

¶34

of the powers under Section 72 of the Kerala Police Act, has taken Ext.P3 decision. The grievance of the petitioners is that Ext.P3 decision was taken after hearing the representatives of only one trade union and without hearing the members of the other unions and the petitioners who are really affected. Section 72 of the Kerala Police

¶35

Act deals with Traffic Regulatory Committees and reads as follows:

¶36

“72. Traffic regulatory committees.-

¶37

(1) In every Grama Panchayat, Municipality and Corporation Traffic Regulatory Committees shall be constituted as may be prescribed, for regulating matters in respect of traffic.

¶38

(2) The concerned head of the Local Government institution shall be the Chairman of the Traffic Regulatory Committee and the nominees of the District Magistrate, the District Police Chief, the Regional Transport Officer and the Executive Engineer of Public Works Department shall be the members of the said committee.

¶39

(3) The Traffic Regulatory Committee shall issue orders, not inconsistent with the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (Central Act 59 of 1988) and the Kerala Road Safety Act, 2007 (Act 8 of 2007) and the rules made thereunder, for preventing danger, obstruction and inconvenience caused to the general public in respect of traffic in the following matters. Such orders issued shall be complied with by the Government Departments concerned, the officers and the general public, namely:-

¶40

W.P.(C) 7736/2022

¶41

¶42

(a) regulate the manner and time of traffic of all kinds in public places;

¶43

(b) regulate the gateways, festoons, banners, hoardings, signs, representations, illuminated displays, construction activity, trade, welding, environmental pollution, nuisance by noise, blasting of rocks, mining, bursting of crackers, flying of kites and fireworks etc. seen in any property in the manner having the possibility of distracting attention of the public road users or causing danger to them;

¶44

(c) regulate the manner and mode of conveyance of timber, poles, ladders, iron girders, beams, iron bars, boilers, hay, soil and articles difficult in handling, etc. along the streets;

¶45

(d) regulate the carrying of any explosive substances or hazardous chemicals along public places which may cause danger to road users;

¶46

(e) close certain streets or instruct that no one shall enter in certain places under circumstances that there is reasonable apprehension of danger from buildings which are on the verge of collapse or due to other reasons;

¶47

(f) regulate the manner and means of entry from streets and public places to private buildings and places situated on the road side;

¶48

(g) fix the manner in which the members of the general public may voluntarily assist in traffic management without causing any financial liability in that respect to the State or the Police Department.

¶49

(4) Subject to the approval of the Traffic Regulatory Committee, the District Police Chief may issue orders on the

¶50

W.P.(C) 7736/2022

¶51

¶52

above matters and such orders shall be submitted before the concerned Traffic Regularity Committee within seven days. (5) The orders submitted in such manner shall be considered by the Traffic Regulatory Committee and appropriate decision shall be taken thereon: Provided that the orders issued by the District Police Chief shall remain in force until a decision is taken by the Traffic Regulatory Committee.

¶53

(6) A District Level Traffic Regulatory Committee shall be constituted, in the manner prescribed by the Government, for coordinating the activities of the Traffic Regulatory Committees in a District and to establish traffic regulations for the district as a whole in the above matters.”

¶54

The Division Bench in Noushad (Supra), held as under:-

¶55

“19. In this context, reference may also be made to S.117 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. As per S.117 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the State Government or any authority authorised in this behalf by the State Government may, in consultation with the local authority having jurisdiction in the area concerned, determine places at which motor vehicle may stand either indefinitely or for a specified period of time and determine the places at which public service vehicles may stop for a longer time than is necessary for the taking up and setting down of passengers. Going by S.117 of the Motor Vehicles Act and R.344 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, it is within the realm of the 8th respondent to determine the location of a parking place for auto rickshaws / taxis in consultation with respondents 2 and 7.

¶56

W.P.(C) 7736/2022

¶57

¶58

S.72(1) of the Kerala Police Act mandates Traffic Regulatory Committees in every Grama Panchayat, Municipality and Corporation for regulating matters in respect of traffic. S.72(2) of the Kerala Police Act provides that the concerned head of the Local Government Institution shall be the Chairman of the Traffic Regulatory Committee and the nominees of the District Magistrate, the District Police Chief, the Regional Transport Officer and the Executive Engineer of the Public Works Department shall be the members of the said committee. S.72(3) provides that the Traffic Regulatory committee shall issue orders, not inconsistent with the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Kerala Road Safety Act, 2007 and the rules made thereunder, for preventing danger, obstruction and inconvenience caused to the general public in respect of traffic in the matters provided under sub-sections (3) (a) to (3)(g) of S.72.”

¶59

On a perusal of the copy of the judgment in W.P.(C) No.18408 of 2019 made available to me, it is seen that the direction therein was to take appropriate decision as to the parking of the autorickshaws owned by the members of the aforesaid trade union, after hearing all sides. It is evident from Ext.P3 decision that the same was taken after hearing only the members of the particular trade union and the representatives of merchants. Taking note of the contentions of the

¶60

W.P.(C) 7736/2022

¶61

¶62

petitioners, there will be a direction to the 1^st respondent to place Ext.P5 representation before the 2^nd respondent-Traffic Regulatory Committee, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. On receipt of Ext.P5, the 2^nd respondent shall consider whether Ext.P3 decision requires a revisit. Such a decision shall be taken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment after hearing the petitioners, the representatives of the trade unions who operate autorickshaws in Purathur Grama Panchayath having halting place at Kavilakkad Angadi, the 4^th respondent and the representatives of the merchants of the area and after site inspection. The views of the local commuters shall also be ascertained at the time of site inspection. Ext. P3 shall continue to be in operation till the 2^nd respondent takes a decision on Ext. P5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of Exts.P3 or P5.

¶63

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶64

Sd/-

¶65

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE

¶66

W.P.(C) 7736/2022

¶67

¶68

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7736/2022

¶69

PETITIONER’s EXHIBITS:

¶70

`Exhibit P1`	`PHOTOGRAPHS OF` `KAVILAKKAD ANGADI`	`THE HALTING PLACE AT` `.`
`Exhibit P2`	`TRUE COPY OF ONE` `PERMIT ALLOTTING` `HALTING PLACE.`	`OF THE CONTRACT CARRIAGE` `KAVILAKKAD ANGADI AS`
`Exhibit P3`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `RESPONDENT DATED`	`THE DECISION OF THE 3RD` `28-1-2020.`
`Exhibit P4`	`A TRUE COPY OF TH` `OBTAINED UNDER R`	`E LETTER DATED 21-08-2019` `IGHT TO INFORMATION ACT`
	`FROM SUB REGIO` `OFFICER, TIRUR.`	`NAL TRANSPORT TRANSPORT`
`Exhibit P5`	`TRUE COPY OF THE` `BY THE PETITIONER`	`REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED` `S DATED 22-2-2022.`

¶71

spc/

Ravi.C v. the Purathur Grama Panchayath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi.C v. the Purathur Grama Panchayath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashla Roy Vs Kerala State Electricity Board - Kseb

V.P.Paul Vs the Secretary

Nandanan P, Vs Secretary

Smt.Geetha Vs State of Kerala

Vidyashree K. Vs Kerala State Electricity Board

Sasikumar N., Vs the Regional Transport Authority