Kerala High Court
Shani Johnson vs Thrissur Municipal Corporation on 22 January, 2025
W.P. (C) No.15431 of 2022 1
2025:KER:4900
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 2ND MAGHA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 15431 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
SHANI JOHNSON,AGED 55 YEARS
W/O. JOHNSON, NADAKKALAL HOUSE, THALORE P.O,
THRISSUR.
BY ADVS.
V.N.HARIDAS
SAIFUDEEN T.S
B.SHAMEERA
NIMISHAMOL SASIDHARAN
RESPONDENT:
THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THRISSUR,
PIN - 680 001
BY ADV SHRI. SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL, SC, THRISSUR
CORPORATION
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 22.01.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P. (C) No.15431 of 2022 2
2025:KER:4900
VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
.................................................................
W.P. (C) No.15431 of 2022
.................................................................
Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2025
ORDER
The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P15
and for a consequential direction to the respondent not to remove the
advertisements from the bus shelters without considering Ext.P17.
2. Petitioner and respondent entered into Ext.P1 agreement for
construction of bus shelters within the Corporation of Thrissur for the
benefit of travelling public. As per clause 2 of Ext.P1 permission has
been granted to the petitioner to construct 28 bus shelters in the city
which are approved by the Road Safety Committee and 110 bus shelters
in the zonal areas of the Corporation as suggested by the respective
councillors within six months. It is further contended that going by clause
3 of Ext.P1 the place where the bus shelters are to be constructed shall
be identified and handed over to the petitioner and any dispute or
objection with regard to the area or place where the bus shelters are to
be constructed, it shall be the responsibility of the respondent to settle
the issue. It is also specifically agreed that the delay caused in settling
the dispute regarding the area and place for construction of the bus
shelters will be excluded from the period of six months fixed in Ext.P1.
2025:KER:4900
Clause 4 of Ext.P1 further stipulates that the petitioner will get the right
to advertise in these bus shelters for a period of 15 years from the date
of completion of the construction and is exempted from payment of
advertisement tax imposed by the Corporation of Thrissur. Petitioner
contends that as on the date of filing of the writ petition, he has
constructed 78 bus shelters within the local limits of the respondent, but
the petitioner could not complete the construction of balance bus
shelters solely due to failure on the part of the respondent to identify the
places where the bus shelters are to be constructed as stipulated in
Ext.P1. It is contended that the identification of the areas spread over a
period of time. By Ext.P2 letter dated 14.02.2006 the respondent
directed the petitioner to construct two bus shelters on two locations as
per Ext.P1. Likewise by Ext.P3 letter dated 22.09.2007 the petitioner
was addressed by the respondent to shift of a bus shelter from its
original place. Due to the inordinate delay in identifying the places/areas
required for constructing the bus shelters petitioner has made requests
before the respondent by Ext.P4 dated 16.03.2010, Ext.P5 dated
03.02.2011 and Ext.P6 dated 18.06.2012. While so Ext.P7 notice was
issued intimating that certain waiting sheds were unauthorisedly
constructed and they were directed to be demolished. To which Ext.P8
reply was submitted by the petitioner. Thereafter nothing was heard in
this regard. While so the petitioner came to know about issuance of
2025:KER:4900
Ext.P9 letter authorising the Engineers and Overseers of the Corporation
to remove all the advertisements exhibited from the bus shelters.
Thereupon the petitioner has approached this Court filing W.P.(C)
No.26909 of 2013 and an interim order was granted by this Court
against the same as evident from Ext.P10. When the Corporation took a
decision to re-tender the bus shelters petitioner has submitted Ext.P11
representation before the Corporation authorities and subsequently
approached this Court filing W.P.(C) No.15737 of 2020 and this Court by
Ext.P12 judgment dated 18.08.2020 disposed of the writ petition.
Thereafter the petitioner was called for a meeting wherein he submitted
Ext.P13 written submission dated 29.09.2020. Thereafter nothing was
heard and the petitioner has made Ext.P14 application dated 29.04.2022
to the respondent to intimate the outcome of hearing. In response to
Ext.P14 petitioner was served with Ext.P15 order dated 12.10.2020, but
the same was served on the petitioner only on 29.04.2022. Thereafter
respondent started removing the advertisements without notice to the
petitioner. Thereupon petitioner has submitted Ext.P17 representation
dated 04.05.2022. It is aggrieved by the action of the respondent in
removing the advertisements as evident from Ext.P16 that the petitioner
has approached this Court filing the above writ petition. A perusal of
Ext.P15 revealed that the action has been taken as the period stipulated
in Ext.P1 is over and that certain bus shelters were constructed by the
2025:KER:4900
petitioner unauthorisedly and therefore the request of the petitioner was
rejected. Petitioner contends that the respondent cannot take a stand
that as per clause 2 of Ext.P1 the period fixed had expired, in as much
as the petitioner was continuing the construction of the bus shelters and
obtaining electric connection and the respondent never prevented the
petitioner from continuing the construction on the ground that the term of
Ext.P1 has already expired.
3. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent
wherein it is contended that the petitioner failed to complete the
construction of the bus shelters within the time provided in Ext.P1
contract and in some places the bus shelters were not installed at all. It
is also submitted that some bus shelters were constructed without the
permission of the traffic authorities and the Corporation had to order to
remove the bus shelters constructed in such a manner as to cause
inconvenience to the public. The Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau
has also reported that the petitioner has constructed bus shelters
unauthorisedly in addition to 63 approved bus shelters and thereupon a
notice was issued to remove the unauthorised bus shelters. It is only
after the term of Ext.P1 has already expired that the council has decided
to call for fresh tender. The advertisement boards were removed by the
Corporation as the petitioner continued to install billboards even after the
contractual period was over and without payment of tax.
2025:KER:4900
4. I have heard the rival contentions of both sides.
5. A perusal of Exts.P11 and P13 requests revealed that the
specific case of the petitioner is that he has constructed various bus
shelters as directed by the Corporation and the date of completion of the
construction is also given in detail in Exts.P11 and P13 and the
contention of the petitioner is that though the bus shelters were
constructed as directed by the Corporation the petitioner should be
permitted to provide advertisement boards for a period of 15 years from
the date of completion of the said bus shelters. Essentially the
contention of the petitioner is that the bus shelters were constructed at
various points of time that too with the consent of the Corporation and
therefore, the petitioner is entitled to continue the advertisements in the
said bus shelters from the date of completion of construction of the
same. But a perusal of Ext.P15 does not reveal that such a contention
raised by the petitioner has been considered in a proper manner. There
is no finding in Ext.P15 to the contention raised by the petitioner in
Exts.P11 and P13 regarding completion of construction of bus shelters
on various dates and that too with the consent of the Corporation. This
Court is of the view that this is a crucial aspect which should have been
considered and decided by the Corporation while passing Ext.P15 order,
but such a consideration is not seen in Ext.P15 and only after entering a
finding on the said aspect, further action could be taken against the
2025:KER:4900
petitioner. It is seen that when the matter came up for consideration on
06.05.2022 an order of status quo has been issued, but it has not been
extended thereafter. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that the work has been re-tendered and only 13 bus shelters
constructed by the petitioner is now existing. Therefore, I am of the view
that the matter requires re-consideration at the hands of the respondent
to the limited extent of 13 bus shelters pointed out by the petitioner to be
existing now. Therefore, there will be a direction to the Secretary of the
respondent Corporation to re-consider the claim of the petitioner in
respect of 13 bus shelters in existence and pass appropriate orders
thereon with notice to the petitioner, within a period of three months from
the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The details of the 13 bus
shelters shall be produced by the petitioner before the respondent
Corporation so as to enable the said respondent to take a decision as
directed above.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
VIJU ABRAHAM
JUDGE
cks
2025:KER:4900
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15431/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED
9/7/2004
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 14/2/2006
ISSUED BY RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT.22/9/2007
SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
16/3/2010
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
3/2/2011
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
18/6/2012
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 15/6/2012
BY RESPONDENT
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 26/6/2012
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE AUTHORIZATION LETTER
ISSUED BY RESPONDENT DATED 18/10/2013
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN
W.P{C} NO.26909/2013 DATED 31/7/2014
Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
DT.22/7/2020 BY PETITIONER
Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
18/8/2020 IN W.P {C} NO.15737/2020
Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION
DT.29/9/2020
Exhibit P14 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT.
29/4/2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
2025:KER:4900
Exhibit P15 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT.
12/10/2020 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER ON
29/4/2022
Exhibit P16 THE TRUE COPIES OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS
EVIDENCING THE REMOVAL OF
ADVERTISEMENTS FROM THE BUS SHELTERS
Exhibit P17 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DT.
4/5/2022 TO THE RESPONDENT.
