Francis Manooran vs State of Kerala and Others

J. Chelameswar, C.J.—This writ petition is filed with the prayers as follows:

For these and other grounds urged at the time of hearing, it is humbly prayed that this Hon''ble court may be pleased to call for the records relating to the proposed project of Vyttila Bus Terminal kept in the office of respondents and

1) Direct the respondents to start and complete the construction of Vyttila Bus Terminal as proposed at an early date by issue of writ of Mandamus or such other writ or direction.

2) Declare that there is no legal impediments in handing over the possession of property owned by agricultural department of government of Kerala in order to facilitate the completion of project of Vyttila Bus Terminal by the issue of a writ of mandamus or such other writ or direction.

3) Direct the respondents to take appropriate steps to make available the property suggested and found to be ideal for Vyttila bus terminal for its construction by the issue of a writ of mandamus or such other writ or direction.

4) Declare that the Vyttila Bus terminal project which was recommended and found to be necessary for Kochi city by all the respondents and the agencies appointed by the respondent is necessary for the Kochi City and it is to be implemented forthwith by issue of writ of mandamus or such other appropriate writ or order or direction.

5) Declare that Vyttila is the ideal place for constructing and stationing the Bus Terminal as found and recommended by the respondents and all the agencies appointed by them by the issue of writ of mandamus or such other writ or direction.

6) Prohibit the respondent from shifting the site of the proposed Bus Terminal at Vyttila to any other place by issue of writ of prohibition or such other writ or order or direction.

7) Pass such other relieves and appropriate steps which this Hon''ble court deems fit in the nature and circumstances of the case.

Briefly stated, the factual background of the case is as follows: It is averred that there is no proper bus-stand in the city of Kochi. It is further averred at paragraph 6 of the writ petition that "after considering all the reports and discussions, the respondents have come to the conclusion that Vyttila is the ideal location for construction of Bus Terminal" though it is not very clear from the pleadings as to who are the respondents who have come to such a conclusion and from where the petitioner obtained such an information. The further details of the various averments made in the writ petition, in our view, are not necessary for the purpose of the present case.

A bare reading of the prayers itself indicates that this Court is being asked to take the role of not only a policy maker but also to declare a policy and also to direct the respondents to enforce such a policy in a time bound manner. We are afraid that the directions such as the one sought in the writ petition are beyond the jurisdiction of this Court. These are all matters essentially in the realm of administration which is exclusively entrusted with the respondents under the scheme of the Constitution. In the circumstances, we do not see any reason to proceed further with the writ petition. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed at the admission stage.