JUDGMENT

The petitioner, who is the owner in possession of 5.84 Ares of property comprised in Re-Sy.No.228/6 in Block No.24 of Vadakkevila Village, by virtue of Ext.P1 Sale Deed No.3129/2009 of the Sub Registrar Office, Eravipuram, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 8 to afford him adequate and effective police protection and not to permit parking of autorickshaws by respondents 9 to 11 and others in front of his property and building covered by Ext.P1 sale deed, situated in Pallimukku Junction, Kollam, having access to NH-47, and to ensure free ingress and egress to the building and his right to get access to the National Highway. The petitioner has also sought for other consequential reliefs. In the writ petition, it is alleged that respondents 9 to 11 and others are unauthorisedly parking autorickshaws in front of the petitioner's building, causing obstruction to free ingress and egress to that building. The petitioner submitted Ext.P4 complaint dated 20.12.2020 before the 5th respondent Station House Officer and thereafter, moved this writ petition before this Court seeking the aforesaid reliefs. The document marked as Ext.P3 is the photographs showing unauthorised parking of autorickshaws in front of the petitioner's building.

2. On 08.01.2021, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Government Pleader took notice on admission for respondents 1 to 6. The learned Standing Counsel took notice on admission for respondents 7 and 8. This Court issued urgent notice on admission by speed post to respondents 9 to 11, returnable within three weeks. This Court directed respondents 5 and 6 and also the 8th respondent to file statements before the next posting date.

3. Along with a memo filed by the learned Government Pleader, the report of the 5th respondent Station House Officer is placed on record.

4. A statement of the 6th respondent Regional Transport Officer is also placed on record. Paragraph 2 of that statement reads thus;

“2. The petitioner Sri.Navabudeen has not yet been submitted any complaint about the case which mentioned in the notice in W.P.(C)No.590 of 2021 to this office. However an enquiry had been conducted through a circle officer of this office based on the notice of Honourable High court of Kerala. In this enquiry report he reported as follows:-

a) The place which mentioned in the complaint, a “No Parking Board” is placed by PWD Department.

b) There is some unauthorized parking of Pick up Auto rickshaws were found.

c) Directions issued to the concerned parties against the unauthorized parking of Auto rickshaws and action has been taken against the unauthorized parking.

d) In the light of the report of the enquiry officer, strict enforcement action will conduct against the unauthorized parking in the upcoming days.”

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 6 and also the learned Standing Counsel for the Kollam Corporation, representing respondents 7 and 8. Despite service of notice, none appears for respondents 9 to 11.

6. In Noushad M. and Others v. State of Kerala and others [2019 (2) KHC 562], a Division Bench of this Court held that permitting parking of autorickshaws permanently in front of shop rooms on the side of Highway is an appropriation of private right of owners of shops and houses to have free access to Highways. Obstructing such private right is not justified. In the said decision the Division Bench was dealing with an unauthorised autorickshaws stand, which has not been approved by the Grama Panchayat or anybody else. In the said decision, arising out of a writ petition filed seeking police protection, this Court directed the Grama Panchayat to constitute Traffic Regulatory Committee in accordance with Section 72 of the Kerala Police Act, 2011 and to determine the location of the parking place for autorickshaws in consultat