IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.Kunhikrishnan, J
Sreekumar – Appellant
Versus
District Collector – Respondent
WP(C) No. 17680 of 2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks enforcement of a traffic committee decision regarding school access. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court directs statutory implementation of unchallenged final regulatory decisions. (Para 3 , 4) |
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :
i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction directing respondents 3 and 4 to implement the decisions of the Traffic Regulatory Committee as evidenced by Ext. P2 prior to the commencement of this academic year.
ii) a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents 1 to 5 to remove unauthorized parking in front of the DIET School, Attingal, iii) any other appropriate writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and allow this petition with all costs.
iv) It is also prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to dispense with the production of translation of vernacular documents produced in the writ petition. For which favour your petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.” [sic]
2. The main prayer in this writ petition is to issue appropriate direction to respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to implement the decision of the Traffic Regulatory Committee as evident by Ext.P2 prior to the commencement of the academic year. The petitioner is the Chairman of the Managing Committee of the District Institute of Education & Training (DIET) School, Attingal. According to the petitioner, the school conducts classes from Grade I to VII and has more than 1000 students. The petitioner is aggrieved by the unauthorised and unregulated parking of vehicles on the eastern side of the school gate, which blocks ingress and egress to the school and causes serious inconvenience. Now, the Traffic Regulatory Committee issued Ext.P2 order. The same is not implemented is the grievance.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner ad the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Municipality.
4. After hearing both sides, I think there can be a direction to the statutory authority to implement Ext.P2 decision, if it became final and the same is not challenged before any authority.
Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following direction :
1) The 3rd and 4th respondents will see that Ext.P2 is implemented in letter and spirit before the school reopens, if it became final and is not challenged before any statutory authority or forum.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.