SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 8050

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
GIRI S – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 40006 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.K.DHRUV KUMAR, SRI.SHAKTHI PRAKASH, SHRI.HARIKRISHNAN M.S.
For the Respondents: GP, SRI K JANARDHANA SHENOY, SHRI.SACHIN RAMESH, SHRI.R.RAJPRADEEP

The authority of the Traffic Regulatory Committee in managing public traffic issues, and the procedural requirements for grievance redressal.

Headnote:This judgment concerns a writ of mandamus requesting the removal of unauthorized parking affecting a petrol pump. The petitioner alleged complaints were not acted upon. The court found the Traffic Regulatory Committee was the appropriate authority to address the grievances. The petitioner was directed to file a fresh representation to ensure timely intervention. The court found that sufficient process was to be afforded to all parties involved, particularly in light of public traffic management duties. The order requested was granted verbatim: The petitioner is free to submit a representation, narrating his grievance, before the Addl. 15th respondent, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

Table of Content
1. petition filed for traffic control measures. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court outlines need for proper grievance process. (Para 3)
3. final directions for petition representation. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with the following prayers:

“I. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 to remove and prevent unauthorized parking of auto rickshaws and to prohibit the unlawful establishment of an informal auto stand in front of Hi Point Fuels, Pathirappally Junction, Alappuzha.

II. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate direction directing Respondent Nos.3 and 5 to ensure continuous and effective police/traffic deployment to keep the ingress and egress of the petrol pump free from obstruction.

III. Direct Respondent Nos.3,4 and 5 to immediately demarcate the frontage as a no-parking zone, install permanent visible signage indicating “No Parking” and cause appropriate traffic regulation measures to be implemented.

IV. To dispense with production of English translation of the Exhibits in vernacular language.

V. To grant such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper and further direction to the Respondents to pay the cost of the proceedings.” (SIC)

2. The petitioner is aggrieved for not considering Ext.P2 to P4 complaints submitted by him for removing unauthorised parking of autorickshaws in front of his petrol pump.

3. Heard, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader and also the counsel appearing for Addl. respondent Nos.6 to 14. I also heard the Standing Counsel appearing for Addl. respondent Nos.15 and 16.

4. After hearing the parties, I am of the considered opinion that these are matters to be looked into by the Traffic Regulatory Committee. Here the Traffic Regulatory Committee is respondent No.15. The petitioner can be allowed to file a fresh representation before the Addl. 15th respondent and there can be a direction to consider the same, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and Addl. respondent Nos.6 to 14.

Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:

1. The petitioner is free to submit a representation, narrating his grievance, before the Addl. 15th respondent, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2. Once such a representation is received, the Addl.

15th respondent will consider the same and pass appropriate orders in it, after giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and Addl. respondent Nos.6 to 14, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the representation.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top