Madras High CourtWP/11246/2026dismissed

A.Karthick v. The Secretary

2026-04-20Honourable The Chief Justice,Honourable Mr.Justice G.Arul Murugan6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 20.04.2026 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN WP No.11246 of 2026 A.Karthick S/o.C.Arjunan, Sogathur X Road, Dharmapuri Taluk, Dharmapuri - 636 809.

Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The Secretary Secretariat, Chennai.

2. The Principal Secretary Tamil Nadu Government Transport Department (TNSTC), Anna Salai, Guindy, Chennai-600 032.

3. The General Manager Tamil Nadu Government Transport Department (TNSTC), Chennai.

4. The Commissioner of Private Transport Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.

5. The District Collector District Collector Office, Dharmapuri.

6. The Regional Transport Officer Regional Transport Office, Dharmapuri.

7. The President District Private Transport Owners Association, Dharmapuri.

8. The President District Private Transport Owners Association, Salem.

Respondent(s) PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 4th respondent to take action on petitioner's representation dated 15.12.2025. For Petitioner(s):

Mr. M.Jaisingh For Respondent(s):Mrs.Akila Rajendran Government Advocate for R1 to R8

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 4th respondent to take action on petitioner's representation dated 15.12.2025.

2. The case of the petitioner is that government is constructing a new bus stand and they are intending to change the route of all the buses coming from Salem District to Dharmapuri New Bus Stand. It is alleged that the said change in route would cause mental agony and hardship to the general public, students, patients, government and private employees. In this regard, the petitioner has sent a representation. As the said representation did not evoke any response, the present writ petition is filed.

3. The determination of bus routes is a specialized task involving an assessment of road capacity, public safety, and commercial viability. This Court does not possess the technical expertise to sit over the decision of the competent authority prescribing the route. It is a settled position of law that in matters of policy, the writ court shall not interfere unless the decision of the authority is shown to be perverse, malafide, or in gross violation of statutory provisions.

4. In the case on hand, it is not in dispute that the new bus stand is still under consideration. Therefore, as on date, no cause of action has arisen.

For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

(SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI,CJ) (G.ARUL MURUGAN,J) 20.04.2026 Index :

Yes/No :

Yes/No sasi

To: