Guberalaxmi Subbaraj vs The Kochi Municipal Corporation
2024 Latest Caselaw 11594 Ker

Kerala High Court

Guberalaxmi Subbaraj vs The Kochi Municipal Corporation on 23 April, 2024

Author: N.Nagaresh

Bench: N.Nagaresh

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
  TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 3RD VAISAKHA, 1946
                   WP(C) NO. 16078 OF 2024
PETITIONER

         GUBERALAXMI SUBBARAJ
         AGED 37 YEARS
         THUNDIPARAMBIL HOUSE, TOLL GATE ROAD,
         VADUTHALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682023

         BY ADVS.
         K.RANA DEEP
         VARSHA SAHAJAN
         SARATH KRISHNAN T.


RESPONDENTS:

    1    THE KOCHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
         P. B. NO. 1016,
         ERNAKULAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
         PIN - 682011
    2    THE SECRETARY
         THE KOCHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
         P. B. NO. 1016, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011

         BY ADV K B ARUNKUMAR

         SRI. AJITH VISWANATHAN-GOVERNMENT PLEADER
         SRI.JANARDHANA SHENOY-STANDING COUNSEL


     THIS WRIT PETITION       (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP     FOR
ADMISSION ON 23.04.2024,      THE COURT ON THE SAME      DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.16078 of 2024
                                  2


                            JUDGMENT

Dated this the 23rd day of April, 2024

The petitioner is before this Court seeking to issue

directions to the respondents to consider Ext.P2

representation submitted by the petitioner and pass necessary

orders to shift the Auto Stand from the current location to

elsewhere in the limits of he 1st respondent-Corporation.

2. The petitioner is resident of the 1st respondent-

Municipal Corporation. He is running a cloth apparel store. An

Auto Stand is functioning in front of the petitioner's shop

blocking access of the petitioner's customers to his shop.

3. The petitioner requested the autorickshaw drivers

to relocate the Auto Stand elsewhere. But, the autorickshaw

drivers did not heed to his demand. Hence, the petitioner filed

Ext.P2 representation before the 2 nd respondent for the Auto

Stand to be relocated elsewhere. But, the 2 nd respondent has

not taken any action on Ext.P2 representation. Due to the

Inaction on the part of the 2nd respondent in considering

Ext.P2 representation, the petitioner is before this Court.

4. Heard.

5. It is evident that Ext.P2 is a representation seeking

to shift Auto Rikshaw Stand. The Auto Rikshaw Stand

obstructs ingress and egress to the shop of the petitioner.

Therefore, it is necessary that the competent authority

considers Ext.P2 in accordance with law, within a reasonable

time.

The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the

2nd respondent-Secretary, Kochi Municipal Corporation to

consider Ext.P2 representation submitted by the petitioner

and take appropriate decision thereon, within a period of two

months in accordance with law, giving opportunity of hearing

to the affected parties.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH JUDGE hmh

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16078/2024

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTO OF THE PETITIONER'S SHOP EVIDENCING PARKING OF AUTORICKSHAWS IN FRONT OF HIS SHOP Exhibit P2 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 06.04.2024