IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE 25TH AUGUST 2011 / 3RD BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 32833 of 2010(D) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ SANTHOSH ABRAHAM VARGHESE, AGED 34, S/O.P.A.VARGHESE, PUTHUPARAMBIL, THIRUVAMPADY PO, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADVS. SRI.M.NARENDRA KUMAR, SMT.LAYA SIMON. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA- REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO MINISTRY OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001. 2. ALAPPUZHA MUNICIPALITY-REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA, PIN 688 001. 3. THE DISTRICT TOURISM PROMOTION COUNCIL, BOAT JETTY ROAD, ALAPPUZHA- 688 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 4. NISSAR, S/O.AHAMMED, AGED 37, RESIDING AT SIYAD MANZIL, LAGANATH WARD, ALAPPUZHA-688 001. 5. SUNEER, S/O.SUBBAIR, AGED 27, RESIDING AT KADAVATHUSSERIYIL, THIRUVAMPADY, ALAPPUZHA 688 001. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.G.GOPAKUMAR R2 BY ADV.SRI.M.K.CHANDRAMOHAN DAS, SC,ALAPPUZHA MUNICIPALITY R4 & R5 BY ADVS.SRI.SHAJI P.CHALY, SRI.ABDUL JALEEL.A, SRI.R.SANJITH, SMT.H.ROSHNI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.32833/2010 D APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION DTD. 09/05/2007 ISSUED UNDER THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX RULES 2005 FOR CONDUCTING IN THE BUSINESS AS AFORESAID. P2: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PAVEMENT AND THE CANAL. P3: COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.607/2010 IN THE COURT OF MUNSIFF, ALLEPPEY. P4: COPY OF THE I.A.NO.3093/10 SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4. P5: COPY OF THE PERMISSION GRANTED TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT DTD.05/08/2010. P5(A): COPY OF THE PERMISSION GRANTED TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT DTD. 06/08/2010. P6: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 12/04/2010 ISSUED BY THE ALAPPUZHA CANAL MANAGEMENT SOCIETY. P7: COPY OF THE LETTER TSA NO.GL 66/09 DTD. 18/09/2010 ADDRESSED TO THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROADS SUB DIVISION, ALAPPUZHA. RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURE: ANNEX.R2(A): COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 24/02/2006 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA. /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss HARUN-UL-RASHID,J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 32833 OF 2010 ------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2011 JUDGMENT Exts.P5 and P5(a) orders granting permission passed by the Secretary of the Alappuzha Municipality are under challenge. The grievance of the petitioner is that the proposed constructions of two bunks by respondents 4 and 5 will obstruct the pedestrians' traffic on the pavement of the road and therefore the said act of respondents 4 and 5 is in violation of Section 207 of the Kerala Municipality Act. It is pointed out by the petitioner that the construction of bunks would hinder vehicular traffic as well as would cause obstruction to the pedestrians. Petitioner produced Ext.P7 letter sent by the Assistant Engineer, (PWD) Roads Section, Alappuzha addressed to the Assistant Executive Engineer, Roads Sub Division Alappuzha, wherein it is stated that the construction of the shop rooms would hinder free flow of a vehicular traffic as well as would cause obstruction to the pedestrians. In these -2- W.P.(C).No.32833/2010 circumstances, the petitioner approached this Court for quashing Exts.P5 and P5(a) orders of permission. 2. In the counter affidavit filed by respondents 4 and 5 it is inter alia contended that during the year 2006 a master plan was introduced by various Governmental agencies for the beautification of Alappuzha town. Pursuant thereto a Society by name 'Alappuzha Canal Management Society' was formed comprising MLA, representatives of the Alappuzha Municipality and officials from different departments. The committee has decided to rehabilitate the roadside vendors in the Municipal area to some convenient area and has authorised a team comprised of Tahsildar Ambalapuzha, members of the Alappuzha Municipality and PWD officials to identify the beneficiaries and to prepare a list. Accordingly, a list of beneficiaries was prepared, which includes the name of respondents 4 and 5. The Society has also collected Rs.10,000/- each from the beneficiaries for the purpose of construction of bunks on puramboke land along the side of the canal. -3- W.P.(C).No.32833/2010 3. Pursuant to the decision taken as stated above the Society has constructed several bunk shops along the commercial canal in between the iron bridge and stone bridge and between the swimming pool and chungam bridge. It is submitted that all the bunk shops constructed were let out to the beneficiaries and other categories. List of beneficiaries is produced as Ext.R5(3) and the agreement executed by one of the tenants is produced as Ext.R5(4). 4. The learned counsel for respondents 4 and 5 pointed out that his clients as plaintiffs had filed O.S.No.610/2010 before the Munsiff's Court, Alappuzha for permanent prohibitory injunction against two persons to restrain them from obstructing the construction of bunks or committing waste or mischief in respect of the construction materials stored in the plaint schedule property. The learned Munsiff passed a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from causing obstruction to the construction works in the plaint schedule property or committing waste or mischief in respect of the construction materials stored in the plaint schedule property. The learned -4- W.P.(C).No.32833/2010 counsel also pointed out that two persons, who wanted to cause obstruction to the construction of bunks, filed O.S.No.607/2010 for permanent prohibitory injunction to restrain respondents 4 and 5 herein from carrying out the construction. It is submitted that the said suit was dismissed. 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the grievance now raised in the writ petition is unfounded. The petitioner has not approached the Alappuzha Municipality at any point of time. He also not filed any suit for the relief now claimed in this writ petition. The suit filed for the very same relief by some other persons was dismissed finding that there is no merit in the contention raised. I find that no sustainable grounds are made out to interfere with Exts.P5 and Ext.P5(a) orders granting permission in favour of respondents 4 and 5. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. kcv.