JUDGMENT : The petitioner says that he is running a small shop in Kanamala Junction, within the territory of the Erumeli Grama Panchayath; and alleges that several autorikshaws and other transport vehicles are being parked in front of his shop in total violation of the applicable laws. He says that even though the area has not been notified or reserved as one which can be used for such purposes, various autorikshaws are being parked on a constant basis, thus blocking his entire business and impeding ingress and egress of his customers to it. He, therefore, prays that the competent respondent be directed to remove such obstruction within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. 2. I notice that when this Writ Petition was considered earlier on 02.09.2021, I had passed the following order: The learned Senior Government Pleader submitted that the unauthorised parking of the autorikshaws in front of the petitioner's shop has already been removed. However, Sri. I. Dinesh Menon – learned counsel for the petitioner, contends otherwise. I, therefore, direct the 5threspondent – Circle Inspector of Police to visit the site and file a report before this Court and ensure that the entrance area of the petitioner's shop is not obstructed in any manner by autorikshaws or other illegal parking. Post on 09.09.2021. 3. Today, when this matter was called, Sri. Aswin Sethumadhavan – learned Senior Government Pleader, submitted that in obedience to the afore directions, all autorikshaws have been removed from the area in question and that the competent Police Officer has been instructed to ensure that no such parking is permitted, unless the operators are granted necessary permission to do so in future by the competent Authority. He, therefore, prayed that this Writ Petition be closed, recording his submissions. 4. Sri. Shyam Kumar – learned Standing Counsel for the 7th respondent – Erumeli Grama Panchayath, also affirmed that the autorikshaws have now been removed from the area in question and added that no such parking will be permitted in violation of law. He submitted that if there is any further violation, assistance of other respondents will be sought for by the Panchayat and prayed that they be directed to act accordingly, as and when any such is made. 5. At this time, Sri. He submitted that if there is any further violation, assistance of other respondents will be sought for by the Panchayat and prayed that they be directed to act accordingly, as and when any such is made. 5. At this time, Sri. Mohammed Shah – a learned counsel, intervened to say that he intends to appear on behalf of certain owners of autorikshaws and other transport vehicles, asserting that his clients had been parking in the area in question for the last more than 30 years. However, to a pointed question, he was unable to inform me under what authority they were doing so, but argued that the building of the petitioner is illegal and that it is, in fact, resting on an electric post dangerously. He submitted that, therefore, the prayers in this Writ Petition are malafide and sought time for his clients to be impleaded in this Writ Petition. 6. Even when I hear Sri. Mohammed Shah as afore, the fact remains that this Court cannot look into the above allegations of the autorikshaw and other transport operators, since they have effective remedies under the applicable law before the competent Authority. If they have a case that they have been parking in the area for the last several years and thus obtaining a right to do so; or that they require an alternate space; or that they will park in the same area without causing obstruction to the petitioner, they will have to first approach the 7th respondent-Secretary with an appropriate application, so that same can be considered by him, after hearing the petitioner also. I cannot see how the operators of autorikshaws can insist that they be allowed to unauthorisedly park in any area on the strength of their assertion that they have been doing so for the last several years. I cannot see how the operators of autorikshaws can insist that they be allowed to unauthorisedly park in any area on the strength of their assertion that they have been doing so for the last several years. In the afore circumstances, I allow this writ petition, recording the afore submissions of the learned Senior Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel for the Grama Panchayath; however, leaving full liberty to the operators of the autorikshaws to approach the 7th respondent or such other authority either for alternate parking space or to establish that they will be able to park in the area in question without any obstruction to the petitioner; in which event, the said Authority will consider the same in terms of law and take necessary action, however, only after hearing the petitioner also. Needless to say, until the autorikshaw operators are able to obtain necessary permission to park their vehicles, no such will be allowed in the area in question and that this shall be ensured by respondents 5 and 6 implicitly.