IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 4125 of 2009(S)
1. K.U.PAUL, S/O.LATE UTHUPPU, AGED 73
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, TRANSPORT
3. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, TRANSPORT
4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE,
5. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, OFFICE OF
For Petitioner :SRI.C.S.MANU
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.S.R.BANNURMATH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH
Dated :03/06/2009
O R D E R
S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & Kurian Joseph, J.
------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.4125 of 2009
------------------------------------------
Dated, this the 3rd day of June, 2009
JUDGMENT
Kurian Joseph, J.
This public interest litigation is filed mainly with the
following prayer:
“issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction directing the
respondents to forthwith pass immediate orders
prohibiting overtaking by stage carriages within
the Ernakulam city limits and also to pass
necessary orders as well as to take obligatory
measures to see that such orders are strictly
complied with.”
2. On behalf of the third respondent a counter affidavit
has been filed. In paragraph 4 of the counter affidavit it is stated as
follows:
W.P.(C) No.4125 of 2009
– 2 –
“There are various categories of stage carriage
operating in the city limit like Express, Ordinary,
Limited Stop, Super Fast, etc. If the request of
the petitioner to prohibit overtaking by stage
carriages within the city is enforced, then there
will not be any difference between the long
distance stage carriages and short distance line
services. As a result passengers of long distance
stage carriages will not get the benefit of such
services. Besides, the destination of different
stage carriages are different. Hence a total
prohibition of overtaking of stage carriages may
not be practical as the buses will have to wait till
bus moving in front moves off even if it is
proceeding to a different destination which will
cause traffic congestion in the city. However
rash and negligent driving has been checked by
the respondents with the available infrastructure
and personals. Government also have taken
several measures like setting up Kerala Road
Safety Authority exclusively for checking road
accidents.”
W.P.(C) No.4125 of 2009
– 3 –
3. In view of the statements in the counter affidavit, we
dispose of the writ petition making it clear that in case the
petitioner has any suggestion to make, he may do so before the
second respondent in which case the second respondent will look
into those suggestions and take appropriate action as permissible
under law in order to avert accidents due to the indiscreet
overtaking.
S.R.Bannurmath,
Chief Justice
Kurian Joseph,
Judge
vns
