Petitioners sought removal of a defunct/unused bus shelter in front of their land via NHAI proceedings. NHAI asserted the shelter was in active public use. The court held petitioners lacked locus standi since the shelter stood on a highway and their land was not encroached, and dismissed the writ petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P(MD)No.9890 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 09.07.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
W.P(MD)No.9890 of 2024
1.G.Thiruvengadam
2.G.Venkatesan
3.G.Saraswathi
(The petitioners are represented by their Power Agent, S.M.Thaajudeen Ahamed).
... Petitioners
Vs.
... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the proceedings of the 2nd respondent in No. NHAI/PIU/Thanj/11015/08/2007/854 dated 04.04.2024 and quash the same and consequently directing the 2nd respondent to remove the defunct / unused bus shelter situate in front of the petitioners land in Survey No.51/1B1B6, Agrama Village, Thiruverumbur Taluka, Tiruchirappalli.
1/4
W.P(MD)No.9890 of 2024
For Petitioners : Mr.Prem Ayyathurai, For M/s.Ajmal Associates. For Respondents : Mr.K.R.Kishor Ram, For M/s.R.B.Law Associates for R1. Mr.Su.Srinivasan, Standing Counsel for R2.
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel on either side.
2.The petitioners want the bus shelter located in front of their land to be removed.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioners reiterated all the contentions set out in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and submitted that the bus shelter was constructed long back and that it is no longer used by the general public and that miscreants are using it for anti-social purposes.
4.The second respondent has filed counter affidavit and the assertions of the petitioners have been strongly denied. In Paragraph No.3 of the counter affidavit, it has been stated that the bus shelter is very much in use and that city
buses are regularly stopping there and the local public are also using the bus https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/4
W.P(MD)No.9890 of 2024
shelter regularly. It is further stated that the bus shelter is being maintained well with seating facilities for local commuters and that it is in useful condition. He pressed for dismissal of the writ petition.
5.I carefully considered the rival contentions. It is not as if the petitioners' land has been encroached upon. The bus shelter is located on a highway. The petitioners have no locus standi to demand its removal. The writ petition is dismissed. No costs.
09.07.2024
NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No ias
W.P(MD)No.9890 of 2024
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
ias
W.P(MD)No.9890 of 2024
09.07.2024
1 issue framed by the court
Do the petitioners have locus standi to demand removal of a bus shelter located on a highway in front of their land?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
G.Thiruvengadam
G.Venkatesan
G.Saraswathi
The Commissioner, Tiruchirappalli City Municipal Corporation
The General Manager (Tech) and Project Director, NHAI - Project Implementation Unit - Thanjavur
G.R.Swaminathan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
