← Library
High Court of KeralaWP(C)/15398/2015disposed of

K.Reghunathan v. The Asst.Commissioner Of Police

2015-05-27Honourable Mr. Justice A.V.Ramakrishna Pillai4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MAY 2015/6TH JYAISHTA, 1937 WP(C).No.15398 of 2015 (Y) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER:

------------------- K.REGHUNATHAN,T.C.28/2382,BHARATH TOURS, OPPOSITE S.L.THEATRE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

BY ADVS.SRI.M.R.ANANDAKUTTAN SMT.M.A.ZOHRA SMT.SOUMYA ISSAC SRI.MAHESH ANANDAKUTTAN RESPONDENT:

---------------------- THE ASST.COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, TRAFFIC,FORT SECTION TRAFFIC OFFICE, PATTOM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004.

BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.K.A.SANJEETHA.

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-05-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

pk

WP(C).No.15398 of 2015 (Y) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

------------------------------------ EXT.P1:TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 23-3-2015L SUBMITTED BEFORE THE RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:

NIL --------------------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE pk

A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.

-------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 15398 of 2015 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of May, 2015

J U D G M E N T

Aggrieved by the non consideration of Ext.P1, the petitioner has come up before this Court.

2.

The petitioner is conducting an establishment by name, "Bharath Tours", situated on the right side of Chettikulangara Over Bridge Road. There are other business concerns like old Bhima Jewellers, Ayyappa's Textiles, SL Theatre Complex etc. nearby the said establishment. The petitioner alleges that due to heavy traffic control and signal lights, he is finding it difficult to have ingress and egress of vehicles to his establishment. He further alleges that though several complaints including Ext.P1 representation, have been submitted before the authorities concerned, it did not evoke any positive response. It is in this context, the petitioner has come up before this Court.

W.P.(C) No. 15398 of 2015 ..2..

3.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. 4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner confined his argument to the limited prayer for a direction to the respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P1 representation within a time frame.

Considering the nature of the submission, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P1 representation after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. To facilitate an early action, the petitioner shall be at liberty to produce a copy of this judgment as well as a copy of this writ petition before the respondent municipality at the earliest.

Sd/- A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI JUDGE bka/-