Disposed

Mahalakshmi.G v. the Chief Secretary

Madras HC9 Jun 2021WP(MD)/6658/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a PIL regarding the non-availability of public toilets at the Regional Transport Office, Srivilliputhur. Finding that a new facility was constructed but uninjured due to election code, the court directed the Government to inaugurate the office not later than 16.07.2021.

What did the court decide?

Directions to expeditiously inaugurate the new RTO complex and fix a date for opening not later than 16.07.2021.

Mahalakshmi.G Vs the Chief Secretary — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.[MD]No.6658 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 09.06.2021 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM AND

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI

¶5

W.P.[MD]No.6658 of 2021

¶6

Ms.G.Mahalakshmi ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

1.The Chief Secretary Government of Tamil Nadu Secretariat, Chennai

¶9

2.The District Collector

¶10

District Collectorate

¶11

Virudhunagar District

¶12

3.The Deputy Transport Commissioner Deputy Transport Commissioner Virudhunagar District

¶13

4.The Regional Transport Office Regional Transport Office Virudhunagar District ...Respondents

¶14

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to construct a new toilet and special toilets for physically challenged people at Regional Transport Office – Srivilliputhur.

¶15

For Petitioner : Ms.G.Sreenisha

¶16

For Respondents : Mr.R.Baskaran

¶17

Standing Counsel for Government

¶18

ORDER

¶19

¶20

[Order of the Court was made by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.]

¶21

We have heard Ms.Sreenisha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.R.Baskaran, learned Standing Counsel for Government appearing for the respondents.

¶22

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

¶23

1/3

¶24

W.P.[MD]No.6658 of 2021

¶25

2.This writ petition has been filed by the practicing lawyer Ms.G.Mahalakshmi as a “Public Interest Litigation” flagging an important issue that is non-availability of toilet and special toilets for Physically challenged people in the Regional Transport Office, Srivilliputhur,

¶26

3.Ms.Sreenisha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, who incidentally happens to be the petitioner's sister, pointed out that there is an urgent and eminent requirement for toilet as lot of public visiting the office of the Regional Transport Office.

¶27

4.Mr.R.Baskaran, learned Standing Counsel for Government appearing for the respondents has drawn our attention to the counter affidavit filed by the Regional Transport Office, wherein it has been stated as follows:-

¶28

“5.I respectfully submit that in the present office premises there is a toilet available within the premises for the office staffs and it doesn't have enough space to have a separate toilet for public in the rented premises. I respectfully submit that the averments mentioned by the petitioners were not brought to my knowledge by her and if it was brought to my knowledge, it would have been addressed properly. On receipt of the petitioner representation and with the consultation with the 2^nd respondent, the District Collector, we have constructed a new toilet for public within the premises of the present Regional Transport Office, and it is functioning now.

¶29

6.I respectfully submit that as per the policy decision of the Government, new Regional Transport Office has been constructed in Srivilliputhur and ready to be put in use. Since the election code of conduct is in force from 26^th February 2021, a new complex was not inaugurated by the Government.

¶30

7.I respectfully submit that the present new complex is constructed to cater the needs of the General Public and the grievance expressed by the petitioner is fulfilled in all aspects.”

¶31

5.From the above averments, it is clear that the issues, which have been flagged by the petitioner in the Writ petition have been addressed and necessary toilets have been constructed in the new complex, but could not be inaugurated on account of the Model Code of Conduct came into force from 26.02.2021. Now, the elections are over and the Government has been formed, expeditious steps should be taken to inaugurate the new office of the Regional https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Transport Office at Srivilliputhur. Necessary steps be taken and

¶32

2/3

¶33

W.P.[MD]No.6658 of 2021

¶34

appropriate date be fixed for opening of the Regional Transport Office at Srivilliputhur as expeditiously as possible not later than 16.07.2021

¶35

6.With the above observations, this Writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶36

Sd/Assistant Registrar (AD-II)

¶37

// True Copy //

¶38

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶39

msa/cp

¶40

Note In view of the present lock down owing : to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶41

¶42

1.The Chief Secretary Government of Tamil Nadu Secretariat, Chennai 2.The District Collector District Collectorate Virudhunagar District

¶43

3.The Deputy Transport Commissioner Deputy Transport Commissioner Virudhunagar District

¶44

4.The Regional Transport Office Regional Transport Office Virudhunagar District.

¶45

+1 CC to M/s.G.SREENISHA, Advocate ( SR-19186[F] dated 11/06/2021 ) +1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-19210[F] dated 11/06/2021 )

¶46

ORDER MADE IN W.P.[MD]No.6658 of 2021 09.06.2021

¶47

CN(21.06.2021) 3P 7C

¶48

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

¶49

3/3

Mahalakshmi.G v. the Chief Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahalakshmi.G v. the Chief Secretary

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

The Director Vs a. Sakthivelu

The Chief Engineer/Personnel Vs M.Rajadurai

Narkis Parvin Vs The Regional Passport Officer

Arockia Richard.P Vs the Dist Collector

Kennady.P Vs the Dist.Collector

Baskaran.T.K Vs the Managing Director