Ratios
a. Collection of lump sum amount by the Corporation from the shop owners would not grant them any right to reserve the road margins adjacent to their shops to their exclusive use.
b. Private persons shall be entitled to park their vehicles in the road margins for which the nearby shop owners had also paid a parking fees to the Corporation.

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE & T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.

1. By way of this Public Interest Litigation, the petitioner seeks a direction upon respondents 1 to 5 to take action against respondents 6 to 15 for encroaching upon the public road by employing the services of Private Security Agencies and for utilizing it for the parking of their vehicles, treating it as their own private parking zone.

2. It has been brought to our notice that the extreme margins of the road are being used by the private shop owners for parking their cars along or that of their customers by putting a rope and earmarking the said space as a private parking zone. The result is that the public at large is deprived of parking their cars on the margins of the road, unless they are customers of a particular establishment.

3. In the counter affidavit filed by the Chennai Corporation, the details of the areas where the respondents 6 to 15 park their vehicles, in an unauthorized manner, are mentioned. From the said counter affidavit it is found that a body called Tamil Nadu Ex-Servicemen Corporation is authorized to collect parking charges on behalf of the Corporation.

4. The private respondent Nos. 6, 7 and 9 have filed counter affidavits, the sum and substance of those counter affidavits are that the Corporation of Chennai, is collecting parking fees at the rate of Rs.450/- per month per car and the cars are parked in front of their office building. The 12th respondent has filed a counter stating that they do not have any parking place and the frontage of their shop is completely blocked by hawkers and other squatters and not even an inch of space is available for parking a cycle.

5. The respondents 2, 3, 4 and 5 have filed a common counter affidavit sworn to by the Additional Commissioner of Police (Traffic). In the counter affidavit it has been stated that certain road side margin is 'paid parking area', and the Corporation of Chennai is collecting parking fees and the Traffic Police do not permit any private institution for parking vehicles on roads other than in the designated parking area. It is further stated that when a particular area is declared as a paid parking area, the identity of the parked vehicle will not be noted and therefore the Traffic Police cannot take any action for violation of the Motor Vehicles Act. Further, it is stated that the Police Authorities have not received any complaint from any affected party alleging that they have been threatened by private security agencies.

6. Thus, it is to be noted that in the areas mentioned by the petitioner, certain extent of the road margin has been earmarked as parking area and a fee is levied on the persons who park their vehicles in the paid parking area. Fee is levied by the Corporation and collected through their agents namely Tamil Nadu Ex-Servicemen Corporation Limited, which is a Government of Tamil Nadu undertaking.

7. As could be seen from the counter affidavit filed by the Commissioner of Corporation of Chennai, in so far as the areas near the establishments of the respondents 6 & 9 to 13, parking being done unauthorisedly though there is certain authorised parking place available; in so far as the respondent No.7 is concerned, it has been stated that the parking is unauthorisedly done by the Bank staff and 8th and 14 respondents are stated to be parking in authorised parking area on fee being collected by the Corporation. Therefore, the Corporation appears to justify their action by stating that in the 'paid parking area' a consolidated amount is being collected from the respective respondents and the vehicles owned by the said respondents or their employees or customers are being allowed to be parked in the said area. Photographs have been placed before us to show that these private respondents have either place placards or tide a rope in the paid parking area and have also written that the said area is exclusively reserved for them.

8. We fail to understand as to on what basis the