(1.) The above appeal is preferred by the petitioner in W. P. (C) No. 17966 of 2022 challenging the judgment dtd. 3/6/2022 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the following reliefs sought for in the writ petition were declined:-
(2.) Brief material facts for the disposal of the appeal are as follows:-
(3.) Appellant is the registered owner of a motor car. He is served with Exts. P2 and P3 charge memos by the Inspector of Police, HighTech Traffic Enforcement Control Room, Thiruvananthapuram, the 9th respondent, for speeding and imposing a fine of Rs.1,500.00. The case of the appellant is that the 9th respondent does not have any jurisdiction or authority to issue the charge memos without erecting sign marks on each and every road stretch, cautioning general public regarding speed limits applicable on the roads managed and maintained by the Union of India, State Government and other statutory authorities. It is also submitted that the 9th respondent has no jurisdiction to issue the impugned charge memos since the charge memos can be issued only by the jurisdictional Police or the competent authority under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the rules thereto.