Kerala High Court
Centre For Consumer Education vs State Of Kerala on 22 November, 2012
Author: K.Vinod Chandran
Bench: Manjula Chellur, K.Vinod Chandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. MANJULA CHELLUR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2013/2ND PHALGUNA 1934
WP(C).No. 27011 of 2012 (S)
---------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
--------------
CENTRE FOR CONSUMER EDUCATION,
MAIN ROAD PALA REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING TRUSTEE DEJO KAPPEN
S/O LATE K.C. JOSEPH RESIDING AT A7
PRESIDENCY HOMES, OPP PF OFFICE, KALOOR, KOCHI
BY ADVS.SRI.JOHNSON MANAYANI
SRI.BENHUR JOSEPH MANAYANI
SRI.JEEVAN MATHEW MANAYANI
RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 696001
2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (STATE POLICE CHIEF),
KERALA, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001
3. TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER & ROAD SAFETY COMMISSIONER KERALA,
TRANS TOWERS, VAZHUTHACAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001
4. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001
5. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001
6. THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD,
DEVASWOM BOARD BUILDINGS, DEVASWOM BOARD ROAD
NANTHYANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001
*ADDL. R7 IMPLEADED
7. NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, G 5 &6 SECTOR 10,
DWARAKA, NEW DELHI 110 075
(*ADDL R7 IMPLEADED SUO MOTU VIDE ORDER DATED 22.11.2012 IN THE WRIT
PETITION)
R2 BY ADV. SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.I. DAVIS
RR6 BY ADV. SRI.KRISHNA MENON, SC, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD
R7 BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ANTONY
R7 BY ADV. SRI.M.P.PRAKASH
R BY SRI.G.BIJU,SC,TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
21.02.2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 27011 of 2012 (S)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE
THE RESPONDENTS 2 TO 5 DT 12.7.2012
EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILS OF SABARIMALA TEMPLE IN
WIKIPEDIA WEBSITE
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES:
EXT. R2(a) : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT 17.3.2010 OF THE DIRECTOR
GENERAL OF POLICE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
jma
Manjula Chellur, C.J. &
K.Vinod Chandran, J.
------------------------------------------
W.P(C) No. 27011 of 2012
--------------------------------------------
Dated this, the 21st day of February, 2013
J U D G M E N T
K.Vinod Chandran, J.:
The above writ petition has been filed as a public interest litigation by a Society, raising socially relevant questions touching upon the safety of passengers commuting through the roads of the State. The petitioners claimed the following reliefs:-
i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writs, directions or orders commanding the respondents to initiate steps to remove all types of obstruction in roads and road margins and recover the costs from those respoinsible for erecting the same. Further, to erect and establish and correct proper destination roads and traffic signals in the public roads leading to Sabarimala. ii.Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writs, directions or orders commanding respondents 2 to 5 to consider and issue appropriate directions in view to the WP(C) No.27011/2012 : 2: petitioner's Exhibit P1.
iii.Issue such other orders as are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
2. We notice that the second respondent Director General of Police, State of Kerala has filed a counter affidavit through the Assistant Inspector General Of Police, Police Head quarters, Thiruvananthapuram admitting the large number of unauthorised advertisements and hoardings in the National as well as the State highways. The said boards erected on the highways as also bye-roads block the line of sight of drivers and vehicles and also results in distracting the drivers. The occurrence of traffic blocks due to such advertisement boards collapsing on to the road and the danger to pedestrians, vehicles and passengers have also been highlighted. However, the police force in the State is said to be aware of such menace and the steps taken to control it has been stated elaborately in the counter affidavit. The various enactments have been noticed in the counter affidavit by the deponent as also the petitioner in Ext.P1.
3. It is not as if there are any impediments or lack of WP(C) No.27011/2012 : 3: legislations in putting a stop to such unauthorised erection of hoardings and advertisement boards. It is also not that the Police are not aware of the same. The deponent of the affidavit, with referennce to the steps taken have stated so in paragraph 8 and 9 of the counter affidavit which is extracted hereunder:-
8.All District Police Chiefs have been alerted to take appropriate actions to see that advertisement/sign boards which are obstructing the vision of the road users shall be removed by seeking assistance of the other Departments. Reports have been called for form the District Police Chiefs regarding the cases registered in connection with the erection of illegal hoardings or flex boards on road margins, etc. In Kochi City, this year three crimes have been registered i.e, Cr. No. 3321/12 u/s.283 IPC and 120(b)KP Act of of Traffic West Police Station, Cr.No. 3322/12 u/s. 283 IPC and 120(B) KP Act of Traffic West Police Station and Cr. No.10887/12 u/s. 283 IPC and 120(b) KP Act of Traffic West Police Station. It is also reported that in Thrissur City two crimes were registered (viz) Cr.
No.245/1 u/s. 338 IPC of Viyyur Police WP(C) No.27011/2012 : 4: Station and Cr.No. 474/12 u/s. 283 IPC of Guruvayur Police Station for putting up illegal advertisement boards.
9.Hence, it is submitted that appropriate directions have already been issued by this respondent to all the District police Chiefs to take urgent action to see that all advertisement/sign boards are removed which are causing obstruction to the destination boards and to the travelling public. Strict directions have also been issued to view the issue seriously and to take appropriate action including registration of crimes against the persons concerned for illegal erecting of advertisement boards, banners, hoardings, etc. Necessary directions have also been issued to forward periodical reports regarding the action taken in this regard.
4. In the context of the counter affidavit filed and the statements made therein, we are of the opinion that the State and its law and order administration are on their toes in ensuring safety of the users of the National and State highways as also other roads particularly in the context of the danger WP(C) No.27011/2012 : 5: caused by unauthorised erection of the hoardings and advertisement boards. We are sure that the grievance of the petitioner stands redressed for the present and the State would act in accordance with the statements in the counter affidavit, made on behalf of the Police Chief.
5. However, we confess to a disquiet and foreboding in our minds, more so, by what we see on the roads on a daily basis. We are not for a moment doubting the statement made in the counter affidavit nor are we importing our personal knowledge into deciding this issue. But looking at the totality of the circumstances, we deem it fit that we direct the 3rd respondent to take appropriate action through the officers deployed towards the end of law and order administration and ensure that various enactments referred to in the counter affidavit and Ext.P1 are implemented with the zeal, and promptitude the situation calls for and in appropriate circumstances and situations; coordinate with the Local Self Government Institutions to prohibit erection of advertisement boards and hoardings completely or partially according to the need of a particular location. We also had the benefit of hearing WP(C) No.27011/2012 : 6: the learned counsel for the National Highway Authority of India, who has stated before us that the Local Self Government Institutions have absolutely no authority to sanction erection of the hoardings or advertisement boards in the national highways. We need not alert the authority of the National Highway Authority of India in the State, to bring such incidents to the notice of the 3rd respondent; who is duty bound to prohibit the same.
In the circumstances, and in the context of the statements made in the counter affidavit, we close the writ petition with the aforementioned directions. The parties are left to suffer their costs.
Sd/-
Manjula Chellur, Chief Justice Sd/-
K.Vinod Chandran,
jma/25.2 Judge.
//true copy//
P.A to Judge