The court held that residents could compel the Corporation to consider their request for road maintenance under the Kerala Municipality Act.

JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with the following prayers:

“i) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 5 & 6 to take necessary steps to repair, maintain and tar the roads leading from transformer junction to the residential houses of the petitioners in ward No.46 of Corporation of Cochin at Vennala within a time limit fixed by this Hon’ble Court.

ii) Issue a writ of mandamus declaring that the tar road admeasuring 690 metres, starting from transformer junction to residential house of the petitioners in ward No.46 of Cochin Corporation at Vennala stand vested with the Corporation of Cochin by virtue of section 207 Kerala Municipality Act .

iii) Issue such other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon/ble Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case.” (SIC)

2. The main prayer in this writ petition is to issue appropriate direction to respondent Nos.5 and 6 to take necessary steps to repair, maintain and tar the road leading from transformer junction to the residential houses of the petitioners in ward No.46 of Corporation of Cochin at Vennala, within a time limit fixed by this Court.

3. A counter affidavit is filed by the Cochin Corporation stating that the road is not belonging to the Corporation. The petitioner relied the judgment of this Court in Mariam Beevi v. Secretary, Athirampuzha Grama Panchayat, Kottayam and Others [2015 (3) KHC 199] .

4. I don’t want to go through the controversies mentioned in this writ petition. The petitioners have got a grievance that the road in question is in a dilapidated condition. The petitioners produced Ext.P4 series of photographs to prove the same. Sections 362 and 363 of the Kerala Municipality Act reads like this:

“362. POWER OF SECRETARY TO ORDER WORK TO BE CARRIED OUT OR TO CARRY IT OUT HIMSELF IN DEFAULT:

(1) Where any private street or part thereof is not levelled, paved, metalled, flagged, channelled, drained, conserved or lighted to the satisfaction of the Secretary, he may, by notice, require the owners or occupiers of building, or lands fronting or abutting on such street or pan thereof to curry out any work, which in his opinion may be necessary and within such time as may be specified in such notice.

(2) Where such work is not carried out within the time specified in the notice, the Secretary may, if he thinks fit, execute it and the expenses incurred shall be paid by the owners or occupiers in default according to the frontage of their respective buildings or lands in such proportion as may be settled by the Secretary.

363. RIGHT OF OWNERS TO REQUIRE STREET TO BE DECLARED PUBLIC.— Where any street has been levelled, paved, metalled, flagged, channelled, drained, conserved and lighted under the provisions of section 362 such street shall, on the requisition of the majority of the owners thereof, be declared a public street.”

5. In the light of the above provision, I think, the petitioners and the other persons interested can submit a representation before the Corporation to take over the road in question by invoking the powers under sections 362 and 363 of the Kerala Municipality Act , because several persons are using that road to reach their houses. If such a represention is received, there can be a direction to consider the same within a time frame. While deciding the matter, the principle laid down by this Court in Mariam Beevi’s case (supra) also will be considered by the Corporation.

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

1. The petitioners are free to submit appropriate representation to take over the road in question invoking the powers under Sections 362 and 363 of the Kerala Municipality Act , within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this