IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 7TH JUNE 2011 / 17TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 13387 of 2011(W) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- BABU MANJALI,CHAIRMAN ANGAMALY OLD MARKET ROAD PROTECTION COUNCIL,MARKET ROAD, ANGAMALY PO. BY ADV. SRI.P.J.PAULACHAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. ANGAMALY MUNICIPALITY,ANGAMALY PO, 683 572 REP.BY SECRETARY. 2. CHAIRMAN, ANGAMALY MUNICIPALITY, ANGAMALY PO.683 572 R1 BY SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM, SENIOR ADVOCATE ADV. SRI.S.SHARAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 13387/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE RELEVENT PORTION OF THE MINUTS OF THE ANGAMALY MUNICIPALITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON 28/04/2011. P2: COPY OF THE RELEVENT PORTION OF THE PETITION FILED BEFORE THE MUNICIPAL CHAIRMAN ON 10/03/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 13387 OF 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 7th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner claims to be the Chairman of the Angamaly Old Market Road protection council, an association of shop owners to protect the Angamaly Old Market Road. This writ petition has been filed mainly with a prayer to declare that the petitioner, his association members and the public have right to move through the newly constructed Municipal office building premises day and night. The further prayer is to issue a writ of mandamus prohibiting the 1st and 2nd respondents from making any construction obstructing the present pathway. The contention of the petitioner is that such a pathway has been in existence from time immemorial. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Senior counsel appearing for the respondents. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the first respondent. The respondents refuted even the description of the locality in question. It is also stated therein the counter affidavit that at no point of time petitioner or in that view of WPC.No.13387/2011 : 2 : the matter any member of the public had given any assurance by the authorities that a passage through the Municipal Office compound would be provided after the construction of the new Municipal Office. It is further stated therein that no petition or complaint had been received by the respondents claiming a pathway through the Municipal Office Complex. It is also stated therein that it came to the notice of the authorities that the back side of the Municipal Office Complex has been utilised by some anti social elements for carrying out illegal and undesirable activities after office hours. In fact, it is in the said circumstances that a decision was taken by the Municipal council to allow passing and re-passing through the Municipal Office compound only from 9.AM to 6 PM. I am of the considered view that in the circumstances mentioned by the respondents the said decision calls for no interference at all. The petitioner has no legal right to claim that a passage should be provided through the premises of the Municipal Building Complex. There is no merit in this writ petition. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge