AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.—The petitioner claims to be the leader of a trade union of autorickshaw drivers. He says that he himself is an autorickshaw driver. There is a rival in the form of additional 7th respondent (a person seeking impleadment). The case sought to be made out is that the petitioner is being harassed by the police officials under the guise of a decision of the Municipality to have all autorickshaws painted in a particular colour. The plea raised is that the decision of the Municipality, if at all there is any, would run contrary to the Motor Vehicle Rules.
We are clear in our mind that this is not a matter to be resolved here. Respondents 4 and 5 will ensure that any action taken against any person on the basis of the so-called decision of the second respondent Municipality and the third respondent RTO will be strictly in conformity with law and there would be no unauthorised intrusion into the rights of the petitioner. It is further clarified that this judgment will not stand in the way of appropriate remedies being sought for against any decision of either among respondents 2 and 3 in accordance with law.