J U D G M E N T

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The petitioner, who is a senior citizen and who has returned to India after 25 years of employment abroad, has filed this writ petition seeking to direct the respondent authorities to prevent the unauthorised parking of autorickshaws in front of the petitioner's building.

2. The petitioner states that he was employed abroad for long and after return to India, he purchased a land utilising his earnings. The petitioner and his son together constructed a commercial building after obtaining Building Permit. At present, tenants are occupying shop rooms in the commercial building constructed by the petitioner.

3. The petitioner contends that autorickshaws are parked unlawfully in front of the petitioner's building on the PWD Road. The unauthorised parking of autorickshaws is causing obstruction to the trading activity of the tenants of the petitioner. Due to this illegal autorickshaw parking, no person is willing to take on lease the vacant shop rooms in the commercial building. The blockade caused by the unauthorised autorickshaw stand, is affecting not only the petitioner and his tenants, but also to the consumers visiting the premises.

4. The petitioner submitted Ext.P1 complaint to the Joint RTO. Ext.P2 complaint was preferred before the Station House Officer also. The petitioner submitted a complaint before the Secretary to the Grama Panchayat as per Ext.P3. In spite of all these complaints, the grievance of the petitioner remains unreddressed.

5. Standing Counsel for respondents 4 and 5 submitted that there is no authorised autorickshaw parking in front of the building of the petitioner. The Panchayat has not earmarked that place for any parking.

6. The Government Pleader, on instructions from the

2nd respondent, submitted that as per the records of the RTO Office, no such autorickshaw parking is permitted at that location.

7. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 to 3 and the learned Standing Counsel representing respondents 4 and 5.

8. The petitioner has constructed a commercial building and let out rooms in the building to various traders. The grievance of the petitioner is that autorickshaws are being parked unauthorisedly in front of his commercial building, obstructing free ingress and egress to the building. Shop owners and consumers find it difficult to access shops in the building.

9. When there is no authorised autorickshaw parking earmarked by any of the competent authorities, parking of autorickshaws at the place, can only be described as unauthorised. The petitioner has made complaints before the authorities but the complaints were of no avail. Since the parking of autorickshaws in front of the petitioner's building is not legally permissible, the authorities are bound to act on the complaints of the petitioner.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondents 2 to 4 to ensure that there is no unauthorised autorickshaw parking in front of the building of the petitioner.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH, JUDGE aks/08.07.2022 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20922/2022 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED

26.05.2022 MADE BY THE PETITIONER TO THE JOINT R.T.O, PUNALUR PROVIDING INFORMATION REGARDING UNAUTHORIZED PARKING OF AUTO RICKSHAWS AT MARKET JUNCTION, KULATHUPUZHA IN FRONT OF THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING OF THE PETITIONER ON THE SIDE OF THE KULATHUPUZHA-

PUNALUR, PWD ROAD.

Exhibit P1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DATED

27.05.2022 EVIDENCING THE DISPATCH OF EXHIBIT P1 COMPLAINT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P1(B) TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD SHOWING THE RECEIPT OF EXHIBIT P1 COMPLAINT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED

26.05.2022 MADE BY THE PETITIONER TO THE S.H.O, KULATHUPUZHA PROVIDING INFORMATION REGARDING UNAUTHORIZED PARKING OF AUTO RICKSHAWS AT MARKET JUNCTION, KULATHUPUZHA ON THE SIDE OF THE KULATHUPUZHA-PUNALUR, PWD ROAD.

Exhibit P