Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Muhammed Jaleel vs State Of Kerala on 11 February, 2026

Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

W.P.(C) No.46798 of 2025




                                     1
                                                     2026:KER:12737

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                  PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

   WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 22ND MAGHA, 1947

                           WP(C) NO. 46798 OF 2025


PETITIONER(S):

              MUHAMMED JALEEL
              AGED 43 YEARS, PERUMPALATHU, PERUNGALA, KAYAMKULAM,
              ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690559

              BY ADVS.
              SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI
              SMT.THAJUNA MARIA FRANCIS

RESPONDENT(S):

      1       STATE OF KERALA
              REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF
              GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
      2       KAYAMKULAM MUNCIPALITY
              REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KAYAMKULAM P.O,
              ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690502
      3       ASSISTANT ENGINEER
              PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ROADS SECTION), GOVERNMENT
              HOSPITAL ROAD, KAYAMKULAM P.O, ALAPPUZHA,
              PIN - 690502
      4       STATION HOUSE OFFICER
              KAYAMKULAM POLICE STATION, KAYAMKULAM P.O, ALAPPUZHA,
              PIN - 690502

              BY ADVS.
              SMT.A.SALINI LAL, SC
              GP, SMT DEEPA V


          THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.46798 of 2025




                                           2
                                                                   2026:KER:12737


                          P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                   ---------------------------------------------
                        W.P.(C) No.46798 of 2025
               ------------------------------------------------------
                Dated this the 11th day of February, 2026


                                   JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with the following prayers:

"I. To Issue a Writ of Mandamus, direction, order directing the respondents to remove flex boards and bill boards erected by the 2nd respondent in the four bus waiting sheds near to petitioner's house at Kayamkulam Boys High School both on the northern and eastern side, bus waiting shed at Kayamkulam-Punalur road, Park Junction and bus waiting shed at Railway over bridge, Kayamkulam forthwith. II. To Issue a Writ of Mandamus, direction, order directing the 3rd respondent to consider Exhibit P3 within a time frame fixed by this Honorable Court and to redress the grievance ventilated by the petitioner forthwith. III. To Issue a Writ of Mandamus, direction, order directing the respondents to ensure that no such illegal installation of flex/notice boards in the four bus waiting sheds mentioned above in future as well thereby ensuring strict compliance with the directions issued by this Honourable Court in St. Stephen's Malankara Catholic Church Vs. State of Kerala (2025 (2) KHC
435).

IV. To Issue such other orders and directions as this Honourable Court may deem just and fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.

W.P.(C) No.46798 of 2025

3

2026:KER:12737 V. To dispense with filing of English translation of documents filed in the above W.P(C)." (SIC)

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents in not removing the alleged illegal flex boards and bill boards erected in a premises of the Kayamkulam Municipality in violation of the principle laid down by this Court in St. Stephen's Malankara Catholic Church v. State of Kerala [2025 (2) KHC 435].

3. A statement is filed by the 2nd respondent as directed by this Court. It will be better to extract the same:

"2. The 5 bus stops in the Kayamkulam town, which were lying without any maintenance and in a dilapidated condition. As part of the beautification of Kayamkulam town, the 2nd respondent conducted a meeting at GDM auditorium Kayamkulam which was open to the public. One AGD Gold and Diamonds and Kaipallil Jewlelers came up with the willingness to maintain the bus sheds. So four bus waiting sheds were reconstructed by the AGD gold and diamonds and one is reconstructed by Kaippallil jewellers. Even though the bus sheds were in the PWD road side, the same was maintained by the Municipal Corporation from the time of construction ie; 2005.
3. It is false that all the bus sheds were demolished and flex boards, banners and bill boards were W.P.(C) No.46798 of 2025 4 2026:KER:12737 erected. As part of town beautification all the 5 bus sheds were reconstructed painted and tiled by these shop owners, so the 2nd respondent permitted them to keep their advertisement in the bus sheds. The 2nd respondent has not permitted anything in violation of the judgment of this hon'ble court. No flex boards or banners were kept in the road causing any hindrance to the vehicles or travelers. Copy of the photograph showing the present bus shed along with the flex board and banner is produced as Annexure R2(a). Copy of the photograph showing the previous condition of the bus shed with flex board and banner is produced as Annexure R2(b). Except the paintings, banners and flex boards in the bus shed no flex boards or banners kept in the road. Now the bus sheds can be used by the public, earlier the same was not maintained and not able to use.
4. Even though Koickal Jewelers entered in to an agreement, they didn't renew the same and not maintained the bus shed. These are all done as a part of Kayamkulam Town beautification and after a joint meeting with all the respondents. Even during the tenure of the petitioner he has not done anything to maintain the bus sheds."

4. The counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the advertisement board seen in Annexure-R2(a) is using flex. The same is against the principle laid down by this Court. If so, the 2 nd respondent W.P.(C) No.46798 of 2025 5 2026:KER:12737 will verify the same after conducting an inspection through the 3rd respondent. If it is found to be a flex board, necessary notice shall be issued to the party who erected it and direct them to replace it with a tin sheet. The 2 nd respondent will also ensure that no flex board is exhibited in the bus waiting shed.

With the above directions and recording the statement filed by the 2nd respondent, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

Sd/-


                                                     P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN,
                                                            JUDGE
nvj

Judgment reserved                NA
Date of Judgment            11.02.2026
Judgment dictated           11.02.2026
Draft Judgment placed       11.02.2026
Final Judgment uploaded         18.02.2026
 W.P.(C) No.46798 of 2025




                                    6
                                                   2026:KER:12737


                 APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 46798 OF 2025

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1         TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 21-11-
                   2025 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO
                   THE 4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P2         TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
                   25-11-2025   TO   THE   2ND RESPONDENT
                   SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P3         TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
                   25-11-2025   TO   THE   3RD RESPONDENT
                   SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
RESPONDENT ANNEXURES

Annexure R2(a)             Copy of the photograph showing the
                           present bus shed along with the flex
                           board and banner
Annexure R2(b)             Copy of the photograph showing the

previous condition of the bushed with flex board and banner