JOHNSON K J Vs. COCHIN CORPORATION,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is the President of an association of people living in and around Vypin within the limits of Kochi Corporation (the Corporation). The Kerala Shipping and Inland Navigation Corporation is operating a Roll-on/roll-off (RORO) service between Vypin and Fortkochi. It is alleged by the petitioner that movements of the members of the association are deeply affected on account of the parking of large number of vehicles awaiting RORO service near the Vypin RORO jetty. The Corporation owns a land measuring 50 cents near the jetty. With a view to remove the hardships to which the people of Vypin are subjected to on account of the parking of vehicles, the petitioner preferred a representation to the Corporation to permit the vehicles to be parked in the said land. Since the Corporation did not consider the said request of the petitioner, he filed W.P.(C) No.27340 of 2018, and this Court disposed of the said writ petition in terms of Ext.P2 judgment, directing the Corporation to consider the said request of the petitioner. Pursuant to Ext.P2 judgment, the Secretary of the Corporation has issued Ext.P3 order stating that the Council of the Corporation has decided to make use of the land pointed out by the petitioner for parking of the vehicles awaiting the RORO service. The case set out by the petitioner in the writ petition is that though Ext.P3 order was passed as early as on 30.01.2020, the same is not given effect to by the Corporation. It is alleged by the petitioner that while so, it is noticed that M/s.Kochi Metro Rail Limited is undertaking some construction work in the said land. The petitioner, therefore, approached this Court seeking directions to the Corporation to give effect to Ext.P3 decision.

(2.) A counter affidavit has been filed by M/s.Kochi Metro Rail Limited stating, among others, that they are assigned the task of implementing an Urban Water Transport Project on behalf of the Government of Kerala; that the Project envisages intermodal connectivity between 38 jetties, bus terminals and metro network across 78 kilometers; that the project envisages a holistic development of the area being connected by waterways as well as by integrating the waterway system as a part of the entire public transport system of the city with focus on connecting people; that as part of the project, M/s.Kochi Metro Rail Limited needs to establish water metro terminals at various places, including one at Vypin; that the Corporation has handed over the 50 cents of land covered by Ext.P3 decision to M/s.Kochi Metro Rail Limited for facilitating the construction of the Water Metro Terminal at Vypin; that the Water Metro terminal at Vypin is designed by M/s.Kochi Metro Rail Limited in such a manner as to accommodate the vehicles waiting for the RORO service as well; that M/s.Kochi Metro Rail Limited has entrusted the construction of the Water Metro Terminal at Vypin to M/s. Mary Matha Infrastructure Private Limited and that the construction work of the Water Metro Terminal is progressing. It is stated by M/s.Kochi Metro Rail Limited in the counter affidavit that they were not aware of Ext.P3 decision. It is also stated by them in the counter affidavit that if Ext.P3 decision is now given effect to, there would be utter confusion and chaos as regards the implementation of the project undertaken by them.

(3.) The Corporation has not chosen to file a counter affidavit in the matter. Having noticed the said fact, on 07.10.2020, this Court directed the Corporation to file a statement in the matter. The Corporation has not chosen to file a statement also, despite the specific direction aforesaid.