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

2019 Supreme(Ker) 531

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, J.
Philip P Mathew and Ors - Appellant
Versus
The Regional Transport Authority Represented By Regional Transport Officer, Ernakulam and Ors - Respondent
WP(C).No.616 of 2019
Decided On : 23-07-2019

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Sri.Noble Mathew
For the Respondent: Smt Mable C.Kurien, Sri.C.V.Manuvilsan

IMPORTANT POINTS
In exercise of the powers conferred under Section 118 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and in supersession of the Rules of the Road Regulations, 1989 the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways issued the Motor Vehicles (Driving) Regulations, 2017. Regulation 5 of the said Regulations deals with duties of drivers and riders. As per sub-regulation (5) of Regulation 5, the driver shall ensure that his vehicle, while moving or when stationary, does not cause any hindrance or undue inconvenience to other road users or to the occupants of any properties. Regulation 22 deals with stopping and parking. As per clause (c) of sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 22, a vehicle shall not be parked on a foot path, cycle track and pedestrian crossing. As per clause (i) of sub-regulation (2), a vehicle shall not be parked in front of the entrance or exit of a property.

Headnote:

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988- Section 118 -Powers conferred under the Act and in supersession of the Rules of the Road Regulations, 1989 the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways issued the Motor Vehicles (Driving) Regulations, 2017- As per clause (c) of sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 22, a vehicle shall not be parked on a foot path, cycle track and pedestrian crossing. As per clause (i) of sub-regulation (2), a vehicle shall not be parked in front of the entrance or exit of a property.

Statement of facts:

The 1st petitioner is the owner of building bearing No.13/508 and the 2nd petitioner is the owner of building bearing No.13/507 on the side of the Irumpanam Refinery Main Road, which is maintained by the Public Works Department. The petitioners have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to fix No parking board in front of their compound wall and to take appropriate action against the illegal encroachers and also to ensure that there is no parking of any vehicle for a stretch of 30 meters in front of their houses. The petitioners have also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to remove all obstructions for their ingress and egress and their vehicles to their houses.

Finding of the court:

Directing the 3rd respondent to ensure strict compliance of the aforesaid provisions under the Motor Vehicles (Driving) Regulations, 2017 thereby preventing parking of any vehicles in front of the entrance of the petitioners' residential buildings-Judgment will not stand in the way of parking of vehicles on the road margin having a width of approximately 2 meters, as evident from Ext.R3(a) photographs, without causing obstruction to vehicular entry to the petitioners' residential buildings and without causing any obstruction to the pedestrians and other road users.

JUDGMENT :

1. The 1st petitioner is the owner of building bearing No.13/508 and the 2nd petitioner is the owner of building bearing No.13/507 on the side of the Irumpanam Refinery Main Road, which is maintained by the Public Works Department. The petitioners have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to fix No parking board in front of their compound wall and to take appropriate action against the illegal encroachers and also to ensure that there is no parking of any vehicle for a stretch of 30 meters in front of their houses. The petitioners have also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to remove all obstructions for their ingress and egress and their vehicles to their houses.

2. On 09.01.2019, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Senior Government Pleader took notice for respondents 1 to 3 and 6. This Court issued urgent notice by speed post to respondents 4 and 5 returnable within two weeks. The learned Senior Government Pleader was directed to get instructions.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 3rd respondent. Paragraphs 5 and 6 of the said counter affidavit read thus;

“5. It is submitted that the Petta-KRL Road is a heavy traffic road. The trucks and tanker lorries coming from difference places including national permits vehicles are parking on the side of these road when the parking in the refinery is full. More over both sides of the Petta-KRL road there are some automobile workshops and Hydraulic Work Shops situated situated. Hence the Kerala and other state vehicles coming for repair are also parking on the both sides of that road including the front area of the petitioner's property.

6. It is submitted that the petitioner had lodged a complaint before this respondent on 02.01.2019 regarding unauthorized parking in front of the petitioner's house. It was got enquired and removed the vehicles parked nearby the petitioner's gate. Between the Petitioners' compound wall and tar road there is a road margin having approximately 2 meters width and Drainage having approximately 8 meters width. Hence parking of the vehicle on either side of the petitioner's gate, keeping sufficient distance from the entry point of the gate, will not obstruct ingress and egress of the petitioners. The traffic police erected three No Parking Boards on the Petta-KRL road in front area of petitioner's gate in order to avoid unauthorized parking. True photographs of the road infront of the Petitioner's property produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R3(a). It is submitted that Traffic Police Tripunithura is very vigilant in this type of unauthorized parking cases and Police is initiating action against the drivers who are parking their vehicles unauthorizedly in front of the petitioners house and on that road.”

(underline supplied)

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3, 5 and 6 and also the learned counsel for the 4th respondent.

5. In exercise of the powers conferred under Section 118 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and in supersession of the Rules of the Road Regulations, 1989 the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways issued the Motor Vehicles (Driving) Regulations, 2017. Regulation 5 of the said Regulations deals with duties of drivers and riders. As per sub-regulation (5) of Regulation 5, the driver shall ensure that his vehicle, while moving or when stationary, does not cause any hindrance or undue inconvenience to other road users or to the occupants of any properties. Regulation 22 deals with stopping and parking. As per clause (c) of sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 22, a vehicle shall not be parked on a foot path, cycle track and pedestrian crossing. As per clause (i) of sub-regulation (2), a vehicle shall not be parked in front of the entrance or exit of a property.

6. In Writ Petition (C) No.295 of 2012 filed under Article 32 of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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