Dismissed

T.Ramalingam v. The Special Commissioner

Madras HC21 Jun 2016WP/19410/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner, claiming to be a physically handicapped person, sought a licence to run a bunk shop near a highway. The Court dismissed the petition, noting the lack of evidence regarding the nature of the business and the potential hindrance to traffic and pedestrians, ruling that granting permission would go against public interest.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed on merits as it was against public interest to grant permission for the bunk shop.

T.Ramalingam Vs The Special Commissioner — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 21.06.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. KIRUBAKARAN

¶5

W.P. No. 19410 of 2015

¶6

T. Ramalingam ..Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Special Commissioner,
For Handicapped,
Office of the State Commissioner
for Disabled,
No. 15/1, Model School Road,
Thousand Lights, Chennai – 6.
2. The Tahsildar,
Thindivanam Taluk, Thindivanam.
3. The Block Development Officer,
Sentoor, Thindivanam,
Villupuram. ..Respondents

¶7

Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2^nd respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 28.02.2015 for issuance of licence for running Bunk Shop on the line of Highway Road by the side of Primary Health Hospital, Opp. Sentoor, Addl. EB Office, Sentoor Village, Thindivanam Taluk, Villupuram District.

¶8

Though the matter has been posted under the caption "For Dismissal", there is no appearance on behalf of the petitioner. Perhaps, foreseeing the fate of the case, the petitioner has not come before this Court.

¶9

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

¶10

The prayer in the writ petition is for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2^nd respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 28.02.2015 for issuance of licence for running Bunk Shop on the line of Highway Road by the side of Primary Health Hospital, Opp. Sentoor, Additional EB Office, Sentoor Village, Thindivanam Taluk, Villupuram District.

¶11

The petitioner claims to be a physically handicapped person and he is running a small bunk shop selling snacks and biscuits on the line of Highway Road by the side of Primary Health Hospital, Opp. Sentoor, Addl. EB Office, Sentoor Village, Thindivanam Taluk, Villupuram District. Since the 3^rd respondent tried to interfere with the petitioner's business, the petitioner gave a representation on 28.05.2015 to the 2^nd respondent, not to disturb his business. However, no orders were passed on the same. Hence, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

¶12

A perusal of the records would reveal that except a document to show that the petitioner is a physically handicapped person, there is nothing to show that he is carrying on business in the said place. It has become a usual practice for some persons, who are physically handicapped, to earn the sympathy of this Court and get favourable orders and thereafter, try to establish a bunk shop near important junctions or landmarks in the city, where they could do good business. Having a bunk shop, either on road margins or on platforms, would cause great hindrance to free flow of traffic as well as for free movement of pedestrians. In the instant case, it is on the line of Highway Road. If any permission is granted, as sought by the petitioner, then it would definitely go against public interest. This writ petition, therefore, deserves to be dismissed and it is accordingly dismissed. It is made clear that this order has been passed, after going through the records, on merits and it is not a simple dismissal. No costs.

¶13

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶14

¶15

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

¶16

¶17

The Special Commissioner, For Handicapped, Office of the State Commissioner for Disabled, No. 15/1, Model School Road, Thousand Lights, Chennai – 6.

¶18

The Tahsildar,
Thindivanam Taluk, Thindivanam.
3. The Block Development Officer,
Sentoor, Thindivanam,
Villupuram.
W.P. No. 19410 of 2015
gj ii co
kra 13.07.2016

¶19

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

T.Ramalingam v. The Special Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.Ramalingam v. The Special Commissioner

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

N.Selvaraju, Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

S.Chandra Vs The Assistant Executive

M/s. Hotel Sudhara, Vs The Commissioner

G.Kandhasamy, Vs The Secretary to Government

K.Samiyappa Gounder, Vs The Executive Engineer (O&M)

Arulmigu Arunachaleeswarar Vs The Chairman