Disposed

D.Vinodkumar @ v. The State Commissioner for

Madras HC4 Aug 2015WP/23634/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The physical challenged petitioner sought a writ directing municipal and corporation authorities to consider his representations for a licence to run a standard bunk shop instead of a push cart. The court directed the Commissioner Corporation of Chennai to pass orders on merits within twelve weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed 2nd respondent to consider petitioner's representations dated 25.03.2015 and 30.06.2015 and pass orders on merits within twelve weeks.

D.Vinodkumar @ Vs The State Commissioner for — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED:04.08.2015

¶3

CORAM

¶4

The Honourable MR. JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARAN

¶5

W.P.No.23634 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015

¶6

D.Vinodkumar @ D.Vinodprasath [ Petitioner ] No.23B Venkadeshwara Street Chelliyamman Nagar Extn Atthipet, Ambattur, Chennai 58 Vs 1 The State Commissioner for Differently Abled O/o. State Commissioner for Differently Abled J.N.Ring Road Chennai 78 2 The Commissioner Corporation of Chennai Rippon Building Chennai 3 3 The Commissioner Municipality Office Ambattur Chennai 53 4 The Administrative Director Sidco Small Factory Industrial Ambattur Estate Chennai 58 [ Respondents ]

¶7

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents to consider and pass orders on the petitioners representation dt 25.3.2015 and 30.6.2015 for grant of licence or permission to start the standard bunk shop at the above said present running push cart shop situated near Pick Fab Engineers Pvt. Ltd. Skyline Foundations No.57 (SP) Ambattur Industrial Estate Chennai 58 wherein selling Coffee Tea and Snacks item.

¶8

For Petitioner : Ms.M.Backiyalakshmi

¶9

For Respondents : Mr.P.V.Selvakumar, (R2) Mr.R.M.Muthukumar, GA (R1,3&4)

¶10

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

¶11

ORDER

¶12

A physically challenged person has approached this Court seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 2 and 3 to consider and pass ordeers on his representations dated 25.03.2015 and 30.06.2015 for grant of licence or permission to start a bunk shop.

¶13

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner had lost his right hand while he was working in a private company and in view of the same, since he cannot continue the job in the said company, he has been doing business in a push cart shop. Since the petitioner is doing the said business in a push cart shop, he seeks permission so that he can erect a standard bunk shop and do the business. The learned counsel for the petitioner also relied upon Section 43 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 to contend that the local authorities or appropriate Government shall have to frame schemes in favour of the persons with disabilities.

¶14

Heard the learned Government Advocate for respondents 1, 3 and 4 and Mr.P.V.Selvakumar, learned counsel for R2.

¶15

In view of the limited prayer sought for by the petitioner, without going into the merits of the case, the 2nd respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's representations dated 25.03.2015 and 30.06.2015 and pass orders on merits and as per law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶16

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶17

¶18

s/dAssistant Registrar(Ad-I)

¶19

True Copy

¶20

Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1 The State Commissioner for Differently Abled O/o. State Commissioner for Differently Abled J.N.Ring Road Chennai 78

¶21

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

¶22

2 The Commissioner Corporation of Chennai Rippon Building Chennai 3 3 The Commissioner Municipality Office Ambattur Chennai 53 4 The Administrative Director Sidco Small Factory Industrial Ambattur Estate Chennai 58 + 1 cc to Ms.M.Backyalakshmi, Advocate SR 40014 + 1 cc to the Govt.Pleader SR 40422 + 1 cc to Mr.P.V.Selvakumar, Advocate SR 40256 rj(co) prk19/8 W.P.No.23634 of 2015

¶23

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

D.Vinodkumar @ v. The State Commissioner for

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D.Vinodkumar @ v. The State Commissioner for

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sivasakthi Corporation Vs The Managing Director

Bee. Bee. John Vs The Assistant Engineer

K.R.Perumal Vs The District Collector

V.Palaniappan Vs The Special Tahsildar(La)

R.Ummar Khan, Vs The District Collector

P.Sasikala Vs The State Govt, Rep by