P.Nandhagopal v. The Chief Engineer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.02.2024 CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY 1.P.Nandhagopal 2.S.James 3.J.Muthulakshmi 4.L.Mariyappan 5.P.Dhanapal 6.M.Palanisamy 7.N.Jayalakshmi 8.M.Kathavarayan 9.Bakkeer Moideen 10.D.Velankanni 11.M.Ramamoorthy 12.S.Marks 13.N.Revathi 14.S.Robert .. Petitioners vs 1.The Chief Engineer, Guindy, Chennai-25.
2.The Divisional Engineer, Saidapet, Chennai-15.
3.The Assistant Divisional Engineer, Tambaram, Chennai-45.
.. Respondents Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to permit the petitioners to do small business through petty and mobile shops at 200 feet radial road Pallavaram to Eachankadu. For the Petitioners : Mr.C.Prakasam For the Respondents : Mr.Abhishek Murthy Government Advocate
ORDER
(Order of the court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) We have heard Mr.C.Prakasam, learned counsel for the petitioners; and, Mr.Abhishek Murthy, learned Government Advocate for the respondents.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were running petty shops and the shops were not situated on the highway. After the highway, there is a service
road. After the service road, there was some space. In that place, the petitioners were doing their business by installing petty shops. The respondent authorities, without any authority and without adhering to due process of law, demolished the petty shops of the petitioners.
3. Learned Government Advocate submits that the provisions of law were adhered to. Section 28(2) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001 was followed while removing the encroachments.
4. On highway, the petitioners certainly cannot be permitted to carry on business. It appears that the business of the petitioners was in the nature of hawking. The petitioners may request the local authority for space in an appropriate hawking zone or such other appropriate place for their shops, which application would be considered by the local authority on its own merits.
5. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. W.M.P.No.448 of 2024 filed by the petitioners to permit them to file a single writ petition is allowed and disposed of.
(S.V.G., CJ.) (D.B.C., J.) 12.02.2024 Index :
Yes/No :
Yes/No bbr To 1.The Chief Engineer, Guindy, Chennai-25.
2.The Divisional Engineer, Saidapet, Chennai-15.
3.The Assistant Divisional Engineer, Tambaram, Chennai-45.
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY,J.
bbr 12.02.2024