Dismissed

K. Rokammal v. The Commissioner

Madras HC16 Mar 2016WP/28510/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, an elderly hawker, sought a writ directing allotment of a shop in Burma Bazaar. The Court dismissed the petition, observing that shop allotment falls under the hawking committee's domain, though the petitioner is free to approach them with proper proof.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed. The petitioner is at liberty to approach the hawking committee with proper proof.

K. Rokammal Vs The Commissioner — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated : 16.03.2016

¶3

Coram

¶4

The Hon'ble Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM

¶5

Writ Petition No.28510 of 2015

¶6

K.Rokammal ...Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The Commissioner Corporation of Chennai Ribbon Building Chennai

¶9

2.The Managing Director Burma Tamizhar Marmalarchi Sangam Teventisar Complex 1^st floor, No 7/8 2^nd Beach Road Rajaji Salai, Chennai-1 ...Respondents

¶10

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to allot a shop in Burma Bazaar premises pursuant to the representation dated 11.05.2015.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Muruganantham For Respondents : Mr.P.V.Selvakumar for R1

¶12

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶13

Petitioner who is an Burma repatriate aged about 81 years was said to have been a hawker in the Burma bazaar area and she seeks for a positive direction to allot a shop in Burma bazaar premises. The NSC Bose road and other adjoining areas have already been declared as a no hawking zone and the question of allotment of shop in any other area was a subject matter of serious contest and ultimately the Hon'ble Supreme Court has finalized a list of applicants as approved by their respective association and alloted shops in and around NSC Bose road area. Therefore, at this juncture the petitioner cannot seek for any

¶14

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

¶15

direction to allot any shop in the Burma bazaar market. Since the petitioner claims to be a hawker she is at liberty to approach the hawking committee by producing proper proof and if the same is done the said committee which is headed by a Hon'ble retired Judge of this Court would consider the same in accordance with law.

¶16

Writ petition is dismissed with the above observation. No costs.

¶17

Sd/-
Asst.Registrar (CS II )
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
To
The Commissioner
Corporation of Chennai,Rippon Building
Chennai
1 cc to Mr.T. Muruganatham, Advocate, SR. 16854
1 cc to Mr.P.V. Selvakumar, Advocate, Sr. 17544
Writ Petition No.28510 of 2015
RV (CO)
kk 30/3

¶18

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

K. Rokammal v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K. Rokammal v. The 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

The Management of Vs Thiru. M.Angu Naidu

V.Ranjith Vs Praveen Ranjan IPS

R.Radhakrishnan Vs The Commissioner

The Management of Addison & Co. Vs the Joint Commissioner of

V.Selvaraj Vs State of Tamil Nadu

N.Janakiraman Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu