SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2015 Supreme(Ker) 1202

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Ashok Bhushan, A.M. Shaffique, JJ.
Project Engineer, Kerala Road Fund Board - Appellant
Vs.
Thankappan and Ors. - Respondents
W.A. No. 1508 of 2015 in WP(C) 33114/2014 and W.P.(C) No. 23374 of 2015
Decided On : 16-10-2015

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Zakir Hussain, SC
For the Respondents: Dinesh R. Shenoy, K.K. Jyothilakshmy and Sanil Jose, Advs.

Headnote:

Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act 2014 - Section 1 (4) - Kerala Municipality Act 1994 - Section 470 - Right of Street vendor to claim - Land, premises and trains owned and controlled by the Railways under the Railway Act, 1989 - Applicability of provisions of Act - held, right has been recognised in accordance with the tenor and scheme of the 2014 Act and it cannot be lead to the interpretation that in exercise of the said right a person can obstruct the widening of roads or construction of bus-bay or any project of public utility nor the said claim can defeat the right of the State Highway Authorities from evicting encroachment - In various Rules and Regulations provisions of vending in street and markets have been made. For eg., in the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994 there are several provisions under Chapter XVII under the heading "regulating the streets

JUDGMENT :

Ashok Bhushan, J.

1. Writ Appeal No. 1508 of 2015 has been filed against the judgment dated 15.03.2015 in W.P(C) No. 33114 of 2014 filed by the first respondent to this Writ Appeal by which judgment the Writ Petition has been allowed directing the respondents to the Writ Petition not to evict or prevent the first respondent from continuing the street vending business at the spot without resorting to the procedure contemplated under the Street Vendors (Protection of livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 or the scheme provided under Ext. P9 Government Policy. W.P(C) No. 23374 of 2015 has been filed as a Public Interest Litigation praying for a direction to respondents to ensure that the bunk shop owned by the 7th respondent to the Writ Petition (petitioner in W.P(C) No. 33114 of 2014) from functioning at its present location in order to facilitate construction of a bus-bay in that place. Parties shall be referred to as described in the W.P(C) No. 33114 of 2014.

2. Facts giving rise to the Writ Appeal are: Writ Petitioner, Thankappan claims to be engaged in street vending on the western side of Ulloor-Medical College road at the Medical College Junction. Petitioner is carrying on the business in a bunk fitted on wheels. Petitioner claims to be selling only vegetables through the said bunk. Petitioner submitted an application for registration of his bunk before the Thiruvananthapuram Corporation on 30.01.2014. Petitioner's case in the Writ Petition is that respondent Nos. 1 to 3 came to the bunk of the petitioner and asked him to remove the bunk. Petitioner submitted representation to the 1st respondent praying that his bunk be not removed. Petitioner claims that removal of his bunk is violative of the provisions of the Street Vendors (Protection of livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as "the 2014 Act").

3. The Project Engineer, Kerala Road Fund Board, who got impleaded in the Writ Petition as additional 5th respondent filed a counter affidavit pleading that the Medical College-Ulloor road is one of the roads selected for widening. In the counter affidavit it was stated that the spot where the bunk is presently stationed by the petitioner is required for road widening and construction of bus-bay. It was also pleaded that under the Kerala Highway Protection Act, 1999 (for short, "the 1999 Act"), the Project Engineer, Kerala Road Fund Board has been declared as the State Highway Authority and entitled to remove any unauthorised construction, portion of the land in which petitioner's bunk is stationed originally belonged to the Kerala Health Research and Welfare Society and it has been transferred to the Kerala Road Fund Board for the construction of the bus-bay as per detailed project report.

4. A statement was also filed by the Thiruvananthapuram Corporation, 4th respondent stating that the Corporation has not granted any permission to the petitioner to carry on any business. The place where the pushcart is placed is a no parking area and there is very heavy traffic congestion due to the situation of the Medical College Hospital. The bunk belonging to the petitioner is causing obstruction to the construction work now carried on by the Kerala Road Fund Board.

5. The learned Single Judge vide judgment dated 05.03.2015 held that petitioner has right under the 2014 Act to carry on business at the spot where he is carrying on the business as on date. It was further held by the learned Single Judge that as per the provisions of the 2014 Act, provisions of the 1999 Act cannot be relied by the 5th respondent. Learned Single Judge although held that eviction of the petitioner is intended for widening of the road, it was held that eviction cannot be justified in violation of the rights conferred under the 2014 Act.

6. The Project Engineer, Kerala Road Fund Board, the 5th respondent, aggrieved by the said judgment, has filed the Writ Appeal.

7. W.P(C) No. 23374 of 2015 has been f



































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top