IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2011 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1933 RP.No. 197 of 2011(H) AGAINST THE ORDER IN WPC.23512/2009 Dated 18/08/2010 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): 1. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PRIVATE BUS OPERATORS ASSOCIATION, REG.NO.TCR 609/93,PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI-25,REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY. 2. M.B.SATHYAN,MULLOOR HOUSE,ESI ROAD, KOCHI-18. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN SRI.M.V.JOSEPH (ALAPPUZHA) RESPONDENT(S): 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,TRIVANDRUM-01. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,BUILDINGS & ROADS, TRIVANDRUM-01. 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY,CENTRAL REGION, VYTTILA,COCHIN-19. 4. UNION OF INDIA,REP.BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,MINISTRY OF SURFACE ROAD, TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS, NEW DELHI-1. 5. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR/DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER,NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT NO.29/1298 A, MANGALYA VALIYA MADOM,VYTTILA,KOCHI-19. ADV. SRI.THOMAS ANTONY FOR R5 GOVT. PLEADER SRI. ANTONY MUKKATH SRI. P. PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASGI. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= R.P. No. 197 of 2011 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 31st day of March, 2011. O R D E R This petition is filed by the petitioners in the writ petition seeking review of my order dated. 18.8.2010 in I.A.No. 11132/2010, which reads as follows: “In this I.A. the petitioners seek the following reliefs: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is humbly prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to collect toll/user fee near Aroor Bridge without maintaining the National Highway-47 and the bridges in good motorable condition, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition.” It is no secret that the entire national highway from Aroor to Thiruvananthapuram is full of potholes and the condition is so worse that it can be said that a person going by a motor vehicle along that road would feel that he is riding on horseback. This situation has been continuing for quite sometime now. In fact that is the condition of most of the roads after the recent monsoon. The National Highway is under the control of the National Highway Authority of India Ltd. Therefore it is their duty to maintain the National Highway. But they have passed on the buck to the State of Kerala to maintain the National Highway from Aroor to Thiruvananthapuram. The State Government takes the stand that the amount of Rs.50,000/- per k.m. given by the National Highway Authority of India for maintenance of the road is palpably insufficient for maintaining the road and it would require at least double that amount to do the repair works. I do not think that on account of the dispute between the State Government and the National Highway Authority of India, the people of the State should suffer. The respondents together is duty bound to find a way to see that the National Highway is kept in good repair always. The respondents shall place their submissions as to within what time they can complete the repair of the National Highway, on record on 30.08.2010. Post on 30.08.2010. This Court was forced to pass that order only in view of the dismal R.P. No. 197 of 2011 -: 2 :- condition of the National Highway at that particular time, which situation may not be available as on this date. The grounds raised in the review petition is absolutely nothing to do with the subject matter of that order. In fact, the petitioner is not aggrieved by any part of the said order. It is for anybody to see that the said order was passed only in general public interest on the ground that when toll is collected from the public, the respondents have a corresponding duty to keep the roads in good repair at all times. On the other hand, what is raised is regarding collection of toll, which is the main relief in the writ petition. I have not said anything on the issue of collection of toll in my order. Therefore, this review petition does not pertain to my order at all and if the petitioners have any ground regarding collection of toll, they will have to raise the same in the writ petition or by a separate I.A. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the review petition and accordingly the same is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE.