Parking of vehicles must not obstruct access to properties, reinforcing adherence to legal norms established in prior judgments.

J U D G M E N T

The petitioners are stated to be the tenants of a building constructed by Sri.Aji Paul and Sri.Biju Paul, having the name Palachuvattil Buildings in Survey No.1/1 of Thiruvaniyoor Grama Panchayat, abutting the Kochi – Madhura National Highway at Puthencruz. The petitioners contend that the autorickshaws are being parked by the party respondents in this writ petition by blocking the entrance to their shops and in such circumstances, they have approached this Court seeking a direction to respondents 3 and 4 to take a decision as regards the urgent action required for the removal of the illegal parking of autorickshaws as stated above.

2. I have heard Sri.A.K.Gopalan, the learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt.K.A.Sanjeetha, the learned counsel for respondents 8 to 13, as well as Sri.Sidharth, the learned counsel for the respondent Panchayat.

3. On an earlier occasion, the owners of the building referred to above, had approached this Court raising almost the same contentions. By Ext.R4(1) judgment in W.P.(C) No.35061 of 2014 dated 24.10.2019, this Court had directed the matter to be taken note of by the Executive Engineer of the National Highway Division in consultation with the Police Authorities and the Panchayat for arriving at an amicable settlement. This Court further notices that a meeting was convened by the Puthencruz Grama Panchayat, and that a decision, as evidenced by Ext.R4(2), was taken, as per which, it was decided that a further joint meeting required to be convened also involving the Thiruvaniyoor Grama Panchayat. The learned counsel for the petitioners points out that there is no requirement for involving the Thiruvaniyoor Grama Panchayat, as the parking is within the Puthencruz Grama Panchayat.

4. The learned counsel for the party respondents would also rely on the judgment of this Court in Philip P. Mathew v. Regional Transport Authority [2019 (3) KLT 918] , as per which, it was categorically laid down that the motor vehicles while being parked has to ensure that they do not cause any hindrance or inconvenience to the road users or the occupants of any properties by parking the same in front of the entrance / exit from the property. With reference to the principles laid down in the afore judgment, Smt.Sanjeetha, the learned counsel for the party respondents would affirm that 2 metres gap is being left by the said respondents and, therefore, they are complying with the directions issued.

5. Taking note of the rival contentions as well as the submission made on behalf of the party respondents, I am of the opinion that it is for the Panchayat authorities as well as the Police, to take note of the principles laid down by this Court in Philip P. Mathew (supra) and to ensure that the autorickshaws are parked without causing any hindrance as directed in the afore judgment by this Court. There will also be a direction to proceed in tune with the decision taken in Ext.R4(2), as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

With the afore observations, this writ petition would stand disposed of.

Sd/-