IMPORTANT POINTS
No transport vehicle, including the vehicles owned/operated by KSRTC and KURTC, shall be permitted to be used in any public place exhibiting advertisements, figures, writings, etc. which are likely to distract the attention of other drivers, cyclists and pedestrians. Exhibition of no such advertisements, figures, writings, etc. shall be permitted on the body of the transport vehicle at places intended for exhibiting the name and address of the operator as per clause (g) of Section 84 of the MV Act; the particulars enumerated in clauses (a) to (g) of Rule 93 of the KMV Rules; the reflectors and reflective tapes as per Rule 104 of the CMV Rules; and also on the safety glass of the windscreen, rear window and side windows of a transport vehicle which has to be maintained as per the standards prescribed under sub-rule (2) of Rule 100 of the CMV Rules.

JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner, the Temple Advisory Committee of Kottiyarmangalam Sree Dharma Sastha Temple under the 2nd respondent Travancore Devaswom Board, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P3 decision No.4(4) dated 16.01.2016 of the 3rd respondent Chenkal Grama Panchayat; Ext.P10 proceedings dated 08.08.2018 of the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat; and Ext.P12 sketch prepared by the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat for autorickshaw parking at Kottamam Junction. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 9 not to permit or establish an autorickshaw stand in front of the petitioner's temple or at any point the temple property touches the National Highway.

2. On 28.05.2019, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Government Pleader took notice on admission for respondents 1, 4 to 6 and 8. The learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board took notice on admission for the 2nd respondent. The learned Standing Counsel for National Highways Authority of India took notice on admission for the 9th respondent. Urgent notice on admission by special messenger was ordered to respondents 3, 7 and 10 to 14, returnable by 06.06.2019. This Court passed an interim order directing the 6th respondent Sub Inspector of Police to ensure that parking of autorickshaws in front of the petitioner's temple is without causing any obstruction to free ingress and egress to the temple.

3. On 12.04.209, the petitioner filed I.A.No.1 of 2019, seeking an order directing respondents 4, 5 and 6 to take action against respondents 10 to 14 and their associates for illegally parking their autorickshaws on the eastern side of the temple, thereby creating a law and order problem in the area. The petitioner has also filed I.A. No.2 of 2019, seeking an order to accept Exts.P20 to P23 as additional documents.

4. A statement has been filed on behalf of the 6th respondent Sub Inspector of Police. The 9th respondent Project Director of National Highways Authority of India has also filed a statement. Respondents 10 to 14 have filed a counter affidavit. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit to the counter affidavit filed by respondents 10 to 14.

5. On 27.06.2019, when this writ petition came up for consideration, after referring to the relevant provisions under the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 and the Motor Vehicles (Driving) Regulations, 2017 and taking note of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Avishek Goenka v. Union of India [(2012) 5 SCC 321] and S. Rajaseekaran v. Union of India [(2018) 13 SCC 532] and the law laid down by this Court in Saji K.M. v. Deputy Transport Commissioner and others [2019 (3) KHC 836] this Court ordered that respondents 10 to 14, who are plying their autorickshaws on the strength of the contract carriage permits granted by the concerned Regional Transport Authority, have to maintain their vehicles in strict compliance of the relevant provisions under the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, failing which appropriate proceedings will have to be initiated against them for plying vehicles which do not comply with the provisions of Chapter V of the said Rules. It was also ordered that, the 6th respondent Sub Inspector of Police, while ensuring that parking of autorickshaws in front of the petitioner's temple is without causing any obstruction to free ingress and egress to the temple, shall also ensure strict compliance of the provisions under the Motor Vehicles (Driving) Regulations, 2017, in the matter of parking of such autorickshaws.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for respondents 1, 4 to 6 and 8, the learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent Travancore Devaswom Board, the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent Grama Panchayat, the learned Standing Counsel for National Highways Authority of India, representing the 9th respondent and also the