IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 9TH MARCH 2010 / 18TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 5673 of 2010(H) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- C.K.ABRAHAM, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.KURIAKOSE,RESIDING AT CHAPPAMATTATHIL, MEENADOM.P.O,KOTTAYAM-686516. BY ADV. SRI.S.JAYAKRISHNAN SRI.VINO V.GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM. 3. AUTORICKSHAW DRIVERS UNION(CITU)< PAMPADY,KOTTAYAM,REPRESENTEDBY ITS CONVENOR SRI.SANTHOSHKUMAR,S/O.THANKAPPAN CHETTIYAR, THANNICKAL,PAMPADY-686 502. 4. AUTO RICKSHAW DRIVERS UNION (BMS), PAMPADY,KOTTAYAM,REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENOR SRI.KOCHUMON ALIAS SANTHOSH,S/O.NARAYANAN, CHIRAYIL MEENADOM,KOTTAYAM. 5. AUTO RICKSHAW DRIVERS UNION(INTUC), PAMPADY,KOTTAYAM,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SRI.BINU-P.JACOB,PADINJAREKKALAYIL MATTAYIL, SOUTH PAMPADY.PO,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. R1 & 2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.T.K. VIPIN DAS ADV. SRI.N.NAGARESH FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES OF CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATIOIN OF THE VEHICLE. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF CONTRACT CARRIAGE PERMIT DT. 29.1.2010. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED FROM AMRITA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES DT. 3.10.2009. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF PETITION DT.15.2.2010. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) 17257/09 DT. 26.6.09. /TRUE COPY/ K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).No. 5673 of 2010 H - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 9th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT Joseph, J. The petitioner approached this Court for a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to grant adequate police protection to the petitioner for operating the vehicle KL 05/AA 6133 Autorikshaw from Pampady Auto stand at Pampady in Kottayam district, without any obstruction from the members of respondents 3 to 5 unions and their men. 2. Briefly the case of the petitioner is as follows. The petitioner is an autorikshaw driver by profession. He is the owner of an autorikshaw bearing Reg. No. KL 05/AA 6133. Ext.P1 is the certificate of registration in respect of the vehicle of the petitioner. Ext.P2 is the permit granted by the Motor Vehicle Department, in which the parking place of the petitioner is shown W.P.(C).No. 5673 of 2010 2 as Pampady. Since the petitioner is not a member of any of the unions, respondents 3 to 5 are not permitting him to park his vehicle in the auto stand. He has taken a loan to purchase the autorikshaw and by the action of respondents 3 to 5 he is put to great difficulties. The petitioner has submitted Ext.P4 complaint before the second respondent. 3. The respondents have filed counter affidavit, inter alia, stating as follows. Petitioner has been granted permit to ply his auto at Pampady town. There is a auto stand situated near Pampady town bus stand. Pampady town bus stand, Chandakavala and Kalachantha are distinct areas. There are approximately 34 autorikshaws plying from the Kalachantha auto stand and knowing this fact the R.T.A. has specified in the permit the parking place as Pampady. The case of the respondents is that the petitioner is attempting to circumvent Ext.P2 permit. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for the party respondents and the learned Government Pleader. W.P.(C).No. 5673 of 2010 3 5. Learned counsel for the party respondents submit that they will not obstruct the petitioner from plying the vehicle or parking his vehicle at Pampady as per Ext.P2. We record the said submission. 6. This Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. We direct respondents 1 and 2 to grant adequate protection to the petitioner for operating his autorikshaw bearing No. KL 5/AA 6133 in terms of Ext.P2 without any obstruction from members of respondents 3 to 5 unions and their men and also give protection to the petitioner for parking the vehicle at the place mentioned in Ext.P2. In case there is any dispute as to the exact area by using the word 'Pampady', it is for the police authorities to consult with the motor vehicle department so as to render protection as ordered by this Court. (K. M. JOSEPH) Judge (M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS) Judge tm