Prasanna Prathapan vs The State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 7565 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

    THURSDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 13TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                       WP(C).No.4031 OF 2021(D)


PETITIONER:

               PRASANNA PRATHAPAN, AGED 54 YEARS
               DAUGHTER OF SMT.MADHAVI,
               THAMARASSERY HOUSE, MULAVUKAD,
               THANTHONNITHURUTH, ERNAKULAM-682 504.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.SAJEN THAMPAN
               SMT.P.P.BLESSY MOL

RESPONDENTS:

      1        THE STATE OF KERALA
               REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
               PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, STATE SECRETARIAT,
               THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

      2        THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
               PWD ROADS, SUB DIVISION, ERNAKULAM-683 101.

      3        THE CORPORATION OF COCHIN,
               REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
               COCHIN CORPORATION-682 011.

      4        ADDL R4, COCHIN SMART MISSION LIMITED-CSML,
               4TH FLOOR, JLN METRO STATION KALOOR, KOCHI-682017,
               KERALA, INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
               ADDL R4 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 23-02-2021 IN
               IA NO.1/2021 IN WP(C)4031/2021.

               R4 BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU (SR.)
               R4 BY ADV. SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI

OTHER PRESENT:

               SR.GP K.P HARISH,
               SC SRI.K.JANARDHANA SHENOY

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P(C).4031/2021
                                     2




                                JUDGMENT

Petitioner is a street vendor earning the livelihood from a KIOSK

allotted to her. Petitioner claims that, pursuant to a beautification

programme undertaken by the additional 4 th respondent, she is

proposed to be removed from that place. Petitioner sought relief in the

nature of directing respondents not to remove her KIOSK.

2. Learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the additional

4th respondent pointed out that the petitioner has already moved

O.S.No.112 of 2019, which is produced as Ext.P5 before the Civil Court

and an application for temporary injunction is pending. Interlocutory

application now stands posted to 10.03.2021. It was also pointed out by

the learned senior counsel for the additional 4 th respondent that, the

work undertaken by CSML is one adopted to bring selected roads in

cities to national standards. The present road, where the petitioner

claims to have put up KIOSK is one among it. The work at Abraham

Madamakkal Road has been completed. Learned Senior Counsel also

pointed out that the petitioner was originally allotted a different spot,

which is evident from Ext.P1. It is near Chathiath road, as indicated in

Ext.P1, from where, she gradually moved to the present spot, which

cannot be permitted.

W.P(C).4031/2021

3. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is

that, due to beautification programme at the road where she was

originally located, she was directed to move to another spot and hence,

she was compelled to shift from one place to another. However, there

are no records to support this contention. Having considered that the

dispute involves question of fact also and since the petitioner has

already moved the civil court, I feel that, it may not be proper to

interfere at this stage.

In the result, Writ Petition is dismissed, however, with a

direction that the petitioner shall bring up the matter before the Civil

Court and seek reliefs at the earliest. If the Court is not sitting due to

COVID-19, petitioner will be free to move before the Judicial Officer-in-

charge of that Court, for an early disposal, which shall be considered by

the Court.

Sd/-

                                              SUNIL THOMAS

Sbna                                              JUDGE
 W.P(C).4031/2021





                         APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1           TRUE COPY OF LETTER BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT

TO THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KSEB, ERNAKULAM DATED 02.06.2017.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF RETAIL INVOICE ISSUED BY THE KERALA AGRO INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LTD.

DATED 04.11.2016.

EXHIBIT P3           TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY     THE
                     KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD TO      THE
                     PETITIONER DATED 29.01.2021.

EXHIBIT P4           TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE FOR THE

PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES ISSUED BY THE MEDICAL BOARD, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES OF THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA TO THE DAUGHTER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 22.10.2016.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT ERNAKULAM NUMBERED AS OS NO.112 OF 2019 DATED 24.01.2019.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION MADE BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 18.10.2019.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION MADE BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 17.10.2019.

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT NUMBERED AS CMP NO.143 OF 2021 ON THE FILES OF THE HON'BLE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT II, ERNAKULAM DATED 05.02.2021.