IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 7TH ASWINA 1930 W.P(C).No. 26157 of 2008(L) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER : ------------------------ PAULSON,S/O PAILAN, THETTAYIL HOUSE, WEST CHALAKUDY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR SMT. P.A. ANITHA RESPONDENTS : -------------------------- 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHALAKUDY. 3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHALAKUDY. 4. AUTO DRIVERS' UNION, CITU, CHALAKUDY MARKET UNIT, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, NEAR MAVELI STORE, MARKET ROAD, CHALAKUDY,. ADV. SRI.SHEEJO CHACKO - R4 SRI.M.N.MANOJ - R4 SRI. A.G.UNNIKRISHNAN -R4 SRI. BENJAMIN PAUL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P(C).No. 26157/2008 APPENDIX PETIITONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF THE PETIITONER'S VEHICLE KL 45 B 5154. EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPODENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT R4(a) : THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT R4(b) : TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 1/9/2008 ISSUED BY S.I OF POLICE, CHALAKUDY. EXHIBIT R4(c) : PHOTOGRAPHS OF GOODS AUTO STAND IN MARKET NEAR TO THE MAVELI STORE AT CHALAKUDY. EXHIBIT R4(d): PHOTOGRAPHS OF GOODS AUTO STAND IN SOUTH JUNCTION, CHALAKUDY. EXHIBIT R4(e): TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION BEARING NO.13 DATED 15/09/2003. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE scm K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI JJ. ----------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.26157 OF 2008-L ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 29th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2008 J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner is the owner of a three wheeler vehicle bearing registration No.KL-45B-5154. He was having an old lambreta autorickshaw which was being plied from the premises of the market in Chalakudy. This new vehicle was purchased by him in July, 2008. Ever since he purchased it, he was parking it near the market and it was being operated from there. While so, the 4th respondent Union started causing obstruction to the parking of the vehicle near the market by the petitioner, from 22.8.2008. The petitioner claims, he is being obstructed because he is not a member of the 4th respondent Union. Therefore, he filed Exhibit P2 petition before the police seeking necessary protection to park his vehicle near the Chalakudy market and to operate it from there. Since no action was taken on Exhibit P2, this Writ Petition is filed, seeking the following relief: “ Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents 1, 2 and 3 to W.P.(C)No.26157/08 -2- afford adequate and effective police protection to the petitioner for parking his three wheeler goods carriage in the market road near the Maveli Store along with other three wheeler goods carriages, in the event of any obstruction from the members of the 4th respondent union.” 2. The 4th respondent has filed a counter affidavit stating that the market area is a very busy area, where large number of vehicles are parked. In support of that submission, the 4th respondent relies on Exhibit R4(c) photographs. It is also pointed out that because of the parking problem, the Circle Inspector of Police, some time back, convened a conference of trade Unions representing autorickshaw drivers and it was decided that vehicles which got registration upto 2005 alone will be allowed to be parked near the market. Those who got new vehicles registered thereafter shall park their vehicles only in the new parking area provided near the south private bus stand. So, the petitioner has to go and park his vehicle there, it is submitted. 3. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit stating that no such decision was taken by the Circle Inspector of Police and in fact newly registered vehicles belonging to the members of the 4th respondent Union are being parked near the market even now. W.P.(C)No.26157/08 -3- 4. The 4th respondent has produced Exhibit R4(e) resolution of the Chalakudy Municipality which shows that the Municipality has suggested that only 55 goods autorickshaws shall be parked near the market and the other vehicles have to be parked in the new parking area. 5. The learned Government Pleader upon instructions submitted that the market area is a very congested area and therefore new vehicles cannot be allowed to park there. The petitioner is at present parking his vehicle in the newly provided area and he is getting sufficient work also. 6. Parking is a perennial problem faced by various operators of vehicles. Going by Exhibit R4(c) photographs, we notice that the market area is a very busy parking area and any steps taken to lessen the congestion there should be welcomed. But such a decision should be taken by the competent authority like the police or the local authority or the Regional Transport Authority and the same shall be implemented without discrimination. The competent authority like the police or Municipality should be conceded freedom to regulate the parking or even prohibit parking in the market area. But the petitioner cannot be prevented from parking his vehicle in the market area on W.P.(C)No.26157/08 -4- the ground of his political faith. The 2nd respondent is directed to find out whether vehicles registered after 2005 are being parked near the market area. If that is done, the petitioner shall also be allowed to park his vehicle, provided there is parking space when the petitioner comes with his vehicle. If anybody causes obstruction, the police shall remove the obstruction. But, if the vehicles registered after 2005 are not allowed to be parked near the market, the petitioner's vehicle need not be allowed to be parked there. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn