Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 22789
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, J
SREEKUMAR T R. – Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT COLLECTOR ALAPPUZHA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 45420 OF 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.SHAJI THANKAPPAN, SRI.SUBIN K SUDHEER, SHRI.AJAY GOPAL, SHRI.AMAL BABY, SHRI.NANDUKRISHNA D., SMT.ANJALI NARAYANAN, SMT.AISWARYA, SHRI.ARJUN P ASHOK KUMAR
For the Respondents: SMT.C.G.BINDU, SHRI.K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR, SMT.DEVISHREE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
Court highlights duty of authorities in addressing public safety concerns through timely action on representations.
Headnote:The petitioner challenges the halting of buses on a congested road, causing traffic hazards. The court directed the Regional Transport Authority to consider the petitioner's representation within two months. The central issue pertains to public safety and transportation regulation. Final orders direct timely resolution of the submitted representation.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. traffic hazards due to bus halting. (Para 1) |
| 2. requirement for timely authority consideration. (Para 2) |
| 3. disposition of writ petition. (Para 3) |
JUDGMENT
The grievance highlighted by the petitioner in this Writ Petition is with regard to the halting of buses near Perumbalam Curve on the Cherthala – Arookutty road. The petitioner submits that the area near the Perumbalam Curve is very congested, and parking of the vehicles at the said area pose traffic hazard and danger to the vehicular users and the pedestrians. The petitioner has therefore preferred Ext.P11 representation before the Regional Transport Authority, the 22nd respondent. The limited prayer of the petitioner is for a consideration of Ext.P11 by the 22nd respondent.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader, the learned counsel for the Panchayath and the learned counsel for respondents 6 to 21.
3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the submissions made across the bar, there will be a direction to the 22nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P11 after hearing the petitioner and respondents 5 to 21, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
