AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Devan Ramachandran, J
The petitioner alleges that he is a Street Vendor and that his ‘cart’ has been taken away by the 2nd respondent – Kochi Corporation, without assigning any reason and prays that the said Authority be directed to return the same to him; with a further direction sought to the 3rd respondent – Station House Officer, to register a case against the said Corporation, under the provisions of the ‘Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act.
In response to the afore submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner – Smt.T.B.Mini, the learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent – Sri.Varghese K. Paul, submitted that the area in question is reserved for his client and that, therefore, the petitioner cannot be allowed to engage in business, as asserted by him. He submitted that, therefore, the plea of the petitioner, that a criminal case be registered against the 2nd respondent, is malicious.
When I evaluate and consider the afore submissions, it is evident that the facts involved in this case are still amorphous. The petitioner alleges that his ‘cart’ has been taken away by the 2nd respondent; while the latter, through their learned Standing Counsel – Sri.Janardhana Shenoy, takes the stand that the petitioner is not eligible to conduct his business in the area in question. This is certainly, therefore, a matter which will have to be decided by the Kochi Corporation at the first instance and it cannot be done by this Court, since it requires evaluation of all relevant facts.
In the afore circumstances, I direct the competent Authority of the 2nd respondent - Kochi Corporation to immediately hear the petitioner and take a decision on his claims, including for return of his ‘cart’, as expeditiously as is possible; for which purpose, I direct him to mark appearance before the said Authority at 11 A.M. on 05.08.2023.
I make it clear that all contentions of the petitioner are left open to be impelled before the competent Authority in terms of the afore directions and I also leave liberty to him to approach this Court again, if so required, in future.
This Writ Petition is thus ordered.