IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 5TH APRIL 2010 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 34407 of 2009(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. P.P.KURIAKOSE, S/O. PATHROSE, AGED 55 YEARS, R/AT PAPPAKUDATHU (H), CSEZ P.O. KAKKANADU, KOCHI-37. 2. K.K.JOHNNY, S/O.KURIAKOSE, AGED 54 YEARS R/AT KUZHIVELIPURATHU (H), THENGODE P.O., KAKKANADU, KOCHI-30. 3. P.J.VARGHESE, S/O.ULAHANNA, AGED 52 YEARS, R/AT PALLIKKAL HOUSE, KUSUMAGIRI P.O. KAKKANADU KOCHI-30. 4. N.M.ABOOBACKER, S/O.MUHAMMED, AGED 42 YEARS, R/AT NAITHILIL HOUSE,KAKKANADU P.O., KAKKANADU, KOCHI-30. 5. M.K.MAJEED, S/O.KOCHUNNI, AGED 38 YEARS, R/AT MALAYIL HOUSE, THENGODE P.O. KAKKANADU, KOCHI-30 6. M.V.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, S/O.NEELAKANDAN NAIR, AGED 43 YERS, R/AT VADAKKEMALIYEKKAL (H), KAKKANADU P.O., KAKKANADU,KOCHI-30. 7. VARGHESE POULOSE, S/O.POULOSE, AGED 38 YEARS,R/AT PAPPAKUDATHU HOUSE, CSEZ P.O., KAKKANADU, KOCHI-37. BY ADV. SRI.TOM JOSE SMT.GEETHA JOB(OZHUKAYIL) SRI.M.R.RAJESH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THRIKKAKARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH R/BY SECRETARY (SPECIAL GRADE), THRIKKAKARA, KAKKANADU P.O., KOCHI-30. WPC NO.34407/09 -2- 2. REGIONAL TRASPORT AUTHORITY, R/BY SECRETARY, RTA, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANADU, KOCHI-30. 3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR (CHAIRMAN, RTA, ERNAKULAM), ERNAKULAM DISTRICT CIVIL STATION, KAKKANADU, KOCHI-30. ADV. SRI.S.SHANAVAS KHAN FOR R1 GOVT.PLEADE SRI.V.MANU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.34407/09 APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS EXT.P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE FOUNDATION STONE LAID ON 15/10/1989 AND THE KAKKANADU TOURIST TAXI STAND OFFICE TOGETHER. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWIN HALTING OF TAXIES IN THE THRIKKAKARA TAXI STAND CUM SHOPPING COMPLEX. EXT.P3: A TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE THRIKKAKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT COMMITTEE DATED 17/9/02. EXT.P4: A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONERS TO THE VARIOUS AUTHORITIES OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT PANCHAYAT DT 23.3.2009. EXT.P5: A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 1/8/09 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 10/8/09 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS. EXT.P7: A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.24146 EXT.P8: A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDERS AND REPLY LETTERS. EXT.P9: A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES SHOWING THE AMOUNT FACILITATED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF TAXI STAND. EXT.P10: A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 16/11/2009. EXT.P11: A TRUE COPY OF THE AUCTION NOTICE SCHEDULED TO BE HELD ON 2/12/2009. EXT.P12: A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT 18/11/2009 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. EXTS. OF R1 EXT.R1(a): TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 4/7/05 ISSUED TO THE T.C.MUHAMMED. EXT.R1(b) SERIES.: ORIGINAL OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS WHICH DISCLOSES THE EXACT LIE OF THE TAXI STAND AND SHOPPING COMPLEX. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 34407 OF 2009 (U) ===================== Dated this the 5th day of April, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioners are operating taxies within the Thrikkakkara Grama Panchayat area. According to the petitioners, since 1989, they are operating their taxi services parking their vehicles in a building constructed by the Panchayat. It is stated that the parking area has been constructed in 7 cents of land obtained from the Government for this specific purpose. It is stated that, of late, Panchayat has been attempting to make use of the area used by the petitioners and other taxi operators for making a shopping complex. In the process, petitioners complain that they will be deprived of the present parking area and are not provided with sufficient alternate space for parking their vehicles. 2. On the other hand, the stand of the Panchayat is that there was no taxi stand as claimed by the petitioners. According to the Panchayat, recently they constructed a shopping complex in the land belonging to them where the petitioners were allowed to park their vehicles. It is stated that, to provide parking space for the taxies operated by the petitioners and others, they have WPC No.34407/09 :2 : already constructed a taxi stand, the photograph of which is Ext.R1(b). It is stated that the existing taxi stand has space sufficient for parking eight vehicles. It is also undertaken before me that if the taxi stand now constructed is insufficient to accommodate the existing taxi cars, the Panchayat is willing to provide additional space in the taxi stand to accommodate such taxi operators. 3. Admittedly, the land in question, either assigned by the Government or otherwise, belongs to the Panchayat. The petitioners were having only permissive use of the space, where they are parking their cars. It is always open to the Panchayat to make use of their land for commercial purposes and derive income out of their properties and none, much less the petitioners, can question this right. The fact that the petitioners were permitted to use the place for parking their vehicles, also cannot prevent the Panchayat from making use of their land, the way they deem fit. At best, the petitioners can request that the Panchayat should provide sufficient space in the Taxi Stand to park their vehicles. Even if this limited right of the petitioners is conceded, the Panchayat has already constructed a taxi stand, WPC No.34407/09 :3 : the photograph of which is Ext.R1(b), and therefore, there can be no grievance in this respect. 4. The Panchayat having constructed the taxi stand as above, the surviving grievance can only be in respect of the sufficiency of space available. 5. Going by the case of the Panchayat itself, the available space in the taxi stand can accommodate only eight taxi cars and according to the petitioners, there are 12 existing taxi operators. Therefore, the presently available taxi stand cannot accommodate all of them. It is in this context that the Panchayat has undertaken before this court that if the existing space is found to be insufficient to accommodate the demand of the presently operating taxies, the Panchayat is willing to provide additional space to take care of their requirements. In my view, this undertaking given on behalf of the Panchayat should be sufficient to redress the grievance of the petitioners and other similar operators. 6. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: WPC No.34407/09 :4 : (1) That vacating the presently occupied place, the petitioners shall occupy the taxi stand constructed and maintained by the Panchayat. (2) It is also ordered that, in the event the space in the taxi stand is insufficient to accommodate the requirements of the petitioners and other existing taxi operators, it will be open to them to make appropriate application to the Panchayat, in which event, the Panchayat will examine their grievance, and on such examination, if it is confirmed that the space in the taxi stand is insufficient to accommodate their vehicles, the Panchayat will provide additional parking space in the taxi stand. This shall be done without any delay in the matter. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp