Disposed

Mr.S.Gnaneswaran v. The Union of India

Madras HC24 Jun 2015WP/18025/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this PIL, the court addressed a grievance regarding the lack of covered shelter for two-wheelers parked in open areas at suburban railway stations. It directed the General Manager of Southern Railways to examine space constraints and arrange for covers within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No.2 to examine space constraints and provide covers for parked two-wheelers within three months; Writ Petition disposed of with no costs.

Mr.S.Gnaneswaran Vs The Union of India — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 24.06.2015

¶3

CORAM

¶4

The Hon'ble MR.SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE AND The Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM

¶5

W.P.No.18025 of 2015
and
M.P.No.1 of 2015
S.Gnaneswaran ... Petitioner
-vs-
1. The Union of India,
rep. by its Secretary,
Ministry of Railways,
New Delhi-1.
2. The General Manager,
Southern Railways,
Chennai-1. ... Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying
for issue of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to provide
shelters in two wheeler parking lots in suburban railway stations.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Gnaneswaran
Party-in-person
For Respondents : Mr.P.T.Ramkumar

¶6

O R D E R (Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble Chief Justice) Notice which is accepted by Mr.P.T.Ramkumar, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2.

¶7

The grievance of the petitioner in this Public Interest Litigation is that the railway services are utilised from suburban stations where the users park their vehicles, including the two

¶8

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶9

wheelers. It is his submission that there is lack of adequate arrangement for parking of such two wheelers and these two wheelers are kept in an open area.

¶10

The learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2 states that there is limitation of space, which is available.

¶11

Be that as it may, respondent No.2 may examine this issue as to what best arrangements could possibly be done to alleviate the constraints of space and providing some cover to the parked vehicles as they are apparently parked in the open, without even a tree shade or any cover. Respondent No.2, thus, to dispose of the representation of the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order.

¶12

The writ petition, accordingly, stands disposed of. No costs.
Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS IV)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
bbr
To
1. The Secretary,
Union of India,
Ministry of Railways,
New Delhi-1.
2. The General Manager,
Southern Railways,
Chennai-1.
+1cc to Mr.P.T.Ram Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No.30981
+1cc to Mr.Gnaneswaran, Advocate, S.R.No.30798
W.P.No.18025 of 2015
PVR(CO)
CA(08/07/2015)

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Mr.S.Gnaneswaran v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.S.Gnaneswaran v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Pachiammal Vs Sabitha IAS

G.Panneerselvam Vs D.Sabitha IAS

K.Krishnan Vs Sabitha IAS

South India Corporation Vs Infrastucture Leasing and Fian

M/s.Ad-Excellent View Point Vs The Chief Executive Officer

V.Prabakaran Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu