IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE TUESDAY, THE 7TH OCTOBER 2008 / 15TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 29739 of 2008(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- 1. ACTION COUNCIL OF AGGRIEVED RESIDENTS OF NH.17 PARKING AREA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN DR.E.A.VENUGOPAL, EASWARAMANGALAM HOUSE P.O.KOTTAPPPURAM,KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT PIN 680 661. 2. A.K. SUHARA, W/O. NA.A. ALI, NJAVELLIPPARAMBIL HOUSE, KOTTAPPURAM PO KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. DR.D. RAJEEV, EASWARAMANGALAM HOUSE KOTTAPPURAM PO, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 4. DR.E.A.VENUGOPAL,EASWARAMANGALAM HOUSE KOTTAPPURAM PO, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 5. K.V.NARAYANAN, KALLIKKATTU HOUSE, KOTTAPPURAM PO, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 6. M.J.JOSEPH, MANAYIL HOUSE, KOTTAPPURAM PO, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 7. DR. SHAJU.A ANTONY, AINIKKAL HOUSE T.K.S.PURAM, KOTTAPPURAM PO, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 8. K.C. ANTONY, KALIYIADAN HOUSE, T.K.S.PURAM, KOTTAPPURAM PO, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.S.KRISHNA PILLAI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SURFACE TRANSPORT MINISTRY OF SHIPPING AND SURFACE TRANSPORT, I SANSAD MARG, NEW DELHI. 2. NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA DEPARTMENT OF SURFACE TRANSPORT MINISTRY OF SHIPPING AND SURFACE TRANSPORT, I SANSAD MARG, NEW DELHI. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, (NATIONAL HIGHWAYS) CETNRAL CIRCLE, VYTTILA, ERNAKULAM . 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENIGNEER, P.W.D. NH DIVISION, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT PIN 680 664. 6. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR, (LA) AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY, KODUNGALLUR, BYEPASS, KODUNGALLUR. ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR FOR R1 BY G.. SRI.BASANTH BALAJI ( R3 TO R6) BY SRI.THOMAS ANTONY (R2) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,J. ------------------------ W.P.(C)No.29739 of 2008 ------------------------ Dated this the 7th of October, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioners, in whose favour this court passed Ext.P5 judgment, have filed this writ petition seeking inter alia following reliefs; a). to call for and examine the records leading to Ext.P2 and to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing or setting it aside; b). to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents to consider and decide upon the feasibility and economic viability of the two alternate sites pointed out by petitioners in Ext.P9 rough sketch for the parking area or other similar facilities, if any, to be provided along the Kodungallur Bye pass on the basis of Ext.P2; WPC.No. 29739/2008 2 c). to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing 6th respondent to get the feasibility and economic viability of the alternate sites for parking area or other similar facilities, if any, to be provided along the Kodungallur Bye pass as pointed out by petitioners in Ext.P9 considered by respondents 1 to 3 before he decides upon petitioner's objections to Ext.P2 as contained in Exts.P4 and P6. 2. When this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Government Pleader Sri.Basanth Balaji took notice for respondents 3 to 6 and Sri.Thomas Antony, learned standing counsel took notice for the 2nd respondent. Sri.Thomas Antony submitted that acquisition for Kodungallur bye pass, which is subject matter of this writ petition, is being carried out by the State Government only, though the provisions of the National Highways Act are invoked. The National Highway Authority, as such, is not involved in the said acquisition. The learned WPC.No. 29739/2008 3 Government Pleader submitted that Ext.P5 judgment has already been given in favour of the petitioners and the 6th respondent – SLAO is competent authority to decide on all the objections raised by the petitioners when he passes orders under Section 3C of the National Highways Act. Sri.P.S.Krishna Pillai, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the main grievance of the petitioners is that the parking area in the proposed bye pass is being located in a manner which is most inconvenient to the petitioners. Ext.P9 is the rough plan submitted by the petitioners before the 6th respondent in which two alternate suggestions for relocating the parking area have been made. The learned counsel submitted that though the 6th respondent is a competent authority and is expected to take a decision on the objection, whether or not the parking area should be shifted is mater on which it is respondents 3 to 5 the requisitioning authorities who are to have a real say. 3. Having considered the rival submissions, I am of the view that it is for the 6th respondent to take a decision with notice to 5th respondent. Under the above circumstances, I dispose of this writ petition issuing the following directions; WPC.No. 29739/2008 4 i). The 6th respondent is directed to issue notice to respondents 4 and 5 in the enquiry, which is being conducted by him, pursuant to Ext.P5 judgment. Respondents 4 and 5, upon receiving notice, will enter appearance before the 6th respondent and offer their versions regarding acceptability of Ext.P9. Before offering versions, those respondents will consider the feasibility of either of the two alternate proposals made by the petitioners in Ext.P9. ii). The 6th respondent will, on receiving the statement from respondents 4 or 5, as the case may be, will hear the parties i.e. the petitioners, respondents 4 and 5 and finalise his orders under Section 3C as already directed in Ext.P5. Till such time as final orders are passed under Section 3C as directed above and as directed in Ext.P5, action for dispossessing the petitioners will be kept in abeyance. iii). Considering the above directions, the 6th respondent is directed not to pass its order under Section 3C pursuant to Ext.P5 for a period of two weeks. (PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE) dpk