IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2008 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1929 W.P(C).No. 8385 of 2008(W) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- JYMES KOI THOMAS, S/O.THOMAS T.V., AGED 33 YEARS, RESIDING AT THARAYIL HOUSE, MALAYATTOOR P.O., ALUVA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.MADHU SRI.P.R.SHIBU RESPONDENT: --------------- THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, PWD (ROAD SECTION), ANGAMALY. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SRI. I.V. PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 8385 OF 2008 - W = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 17th March, 2008 J U D G M E N T The prayer sought in this writ petition is to direct the respondent not to interfere with the petitioner conducting a temporary fruit stall in front of his property facing Kalady- Malayattoor PWD road in connection with the festival of St. Thomas Church, Malayattoor during the period between 4.3.2008 to 3.4.2008. Counsel for the petitioner refers to Ext. P1 judgment and Ext.P2 order of this Court to justify the prayer now made. 2. As is evident from the prayer itself the temporary stall put up by the petitioner is not in his property, but in front of his property, which is a puramboke land. 3. The learned Govt. Pleader points out that the presence of the fruit stall of the petitioner, is creating obstruction to the pilgrims and the traffic. It is also pointed out that if the petitioner is allowed to remain where he is, that will lead to a situation where several other people will follow. According to the learned Govt. W.P.(C) No. 8385 OF 2008 - 2 - Pleader, this can create difficulties for the smooth conduct of the festival. 4. Having considered this matter, I am not in a position to see any right for the petitioner to demand that he should be permitted to conduct the fruit stall in the puramboke land. As is evident from the prayer itself, the petitioner himself is having enough property to locate the stall. Therefore, the petitioner cannot have any right to retain the stall in the puramboke land. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-