IMPORTANT POINTS
Whenever any public interest is invoked, the court must examine the case to ensure that there is in fact, genuine public interest involved. The court must maintain strict vigilance to ensure that there is no abuse of the process of court and that, "ordinarily meddlesome bystanders are not granted a Visa". Many societal pollutants create new problems of non-redressed grievances, and the court should make an earnest endeavour to take up those cases, where the subjective purpose of the lis justifies the need for it.

JUDGMENT :

S. Manikumar, J.

Being aggrieved by the judgment dated 11.12.2019 in W.P. (C)No.30010 of 2019, instant writ appeal is filed. Short facts leading to the writ petition are as hereunder:

The petitioner/appellant is conducting a small textile shop by name “Pavithra Garments” near to Tripunithura Sree Poornathrayeesha Temple for the last few years. Tripunithura area is a thickly populated one and one of the busiest city in Ernakulam District. The peculiar feature of Tripunithura, especially town area, is that the public roads therein are very narrow one, resulting in heavy crowd and has no capacity to accommodate the vehicles and the people coming there. The town area in Tripunithura is owned by the Public Works Department. The Public Works Department has provided small footpath on either side of the road for the use of the pedestrians. It is learnt by the petitioner that the respondent Municipality is intending to give the public roads, footpaths, etc. for rent for doing street vending business. If any of the public roads and footpaths in the area are given on rent, the traffic block in that area will be unpredictable and the pedestrian has no other means even to walk. If the public roads and footpaths are given on rent by the Municipality, the shop owners and their respective customers have no means to enter into the shop rooms from the public road. Hence, the petitioner/appellant has filed the writ petition for the following relief:

“i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or any direction commanding the respondents not to give the public roads and the footpaths under their limits for rent to anybody for doing street vending business.”

2. The writ court, after considering the pleadings and the material on record, closed the writ petition by observing thus:

“3. I have considered the afore submissions and am certainly of the view that the declarations of this Court in Vasanth Nagar Allottees' Association (supra) covers the field and that the Municipality will have to abide by the directions therein. That said, since it is asserted before me by the Municipality and which is not controverted by the petitioner -that even during the festival time, the area in front of his business had not been obstructed or occupied by any other person, I am certainly of the view that this writ petition has now become purely academic in nature, particularly because the said festival is now over and the allegations made in this writ petition are no longer relevant.

Resultantly, I close this writ petition, however, leaving full liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court as and when any violation is found by him to the declarations of this Court in Vasanth Nagar Allottees' Association (supra); for which purpose all contentions impelled by him in this writ petition are left open.

This writ petition is thus closed. ”

Being aggrieved, the instant writ appeal is filed.

3. Though Mr.Paul K.Varghese, learned counsel for the appellant made submissions on the grounds raised, going through the impugned judgment, it is amply clear that the Municipality, by filing Ext.R4(B) photographs, has substantiated the stand before the writ court that the appellant's shop has not been obstructed in any manner, nor its ingress and egress impeded on account of the ongoing temple festival. Writ court has also observed that public road and pavement were not allotted to the street vendors permanently, but they were allowed to do small business during temple festival and that the same was also over. That apart, on consideration of the material on record, writ court has also found that even during the temple festival time, the area in front of the appellant's shop was not obstructed or occupied by any other person.

4. Though the learned counsel for the appellant made submissions relying on the decision of this court in Vasanth Nagar Allottees' Association v. District Collector (2000 (1) KLT 148), we are not inclined to interfere with the decision made in the