Seena Davis v. State Of Kerala

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST 2015/12TH SRAVANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 16656 of 2015 (F) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

-------------------------- SEENA DAVIS, FLAT NO. 7D, WEST FERNKILL GARDENS, 46, RING ROAD, 6TH SECTOR, HSR LAYOUT, BANGALORE.

BY ADV. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW.

RESPONDENT(S):

----------------------------

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD ROADS DIVISION, NEAR NGO QUARTERS, ERNAKULAM- 682 030.

BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.S. JAMAL.

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03-08-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

rs.

WP(C).No. 16656 of 2015 (F) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- P1:

PHOTOCOPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 23.01.2015 IN RESPECT OF THE PORTION OF BUILDING HAVING AN EXTENT OF 1500 SQ.FT. P2:

PHOTOCOPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 07.02.2015.

P3:

PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PRESENT SITUATION OF THE BUS WAITING SHED AND THE FLEX BOARD OF 'FONE 4'.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs.

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

===================== W.P.(C) No.16656 of 2015 - F ====================== Dated this the 3rd day of August, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is aggrieved with the flex board (advertisement board) said to have been erected in the waiting shed in Shanmugham road, which waiting shed admittedly belongs to the Public Works Department (P.W.D). The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that the flex board causes the view of the petitioner's shop to be hampered. The petitioner cannot raise any such contention, since, admittedly, the flex board is mounted on the waiting shed of the PWD and it does not cause any obstruction to the ingress and aggress to the petitioner's shop.

2. If at all the petitioner's contention is that the same is unauthorised, then the petitioner has to approach the appropriate authorities, which the petitioner said to have been done by Ext.P2. However, no mandamus can be issued herein,

W.P.(C) No.16656 of 2015 - F since the entity for which the advertisement is exhibited, is made a party herein.

The writ petition hence, would stand dismissed. Sd/- K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE SB // true copy // P.A to Judge.