V.G.Thiruvengadam v. The General Manager
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17.03.2021 CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY W.P.No.6936 of 2021 V.G.Thiruvengadam ...
petitioner Vs 1 The General Manager Southern Railway Park Town Chennai - 600 003.
2 The Divisional Commercial Manager Southern Railway Chennai - 600 003.
3 The District Collector Kancheepuram District.
4 The Tahsildar Chengalpattu.
5 The District Collector Chengalpattu District ...
respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to forthwith consider the proposal for the new halt Railway Station at Otteri Vandalur Village Chengalpattu District (Opposite to Aringar Anna Zoological Park and behind TEAM Company) on the basis of the 3rd respondents Letter No. 9112 / 2015 / E1 dated 23.08.2017 and that of the 4th respondents Letter NO. 8692 / 2009 / A2 dated 01.02.2018 pursuant to the petitioners representation dated 17.04.2017 and that of the reminder representation dated 30.01.2021 on merits and as per law within a time to be stipulated
For Petitioner : Mr.L.Chandrakumar For Respondents : Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan, State Government Pleader, for respondents 3 to 5 Mr.P.T.Ramkumar, for respondents 1 and 2
ORDER
(made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) The petitioner wants a railway station to be set up at Otteri, Vandalur Village, Chengalpattu District, opposite the Arignar Anna Zoological Park.
2. The petitioner claims that a feasibility study may already have been conducted and representations are pending with the respondents since or about 2017, but no final decision has yet been taken.
3. Both the State and the Railways are represented.
4. The Court is scarcely the appropriate authority to decide whether a railway station or a stoppage may be introduced at a particular place. There are several considerations which go into the decision-making process in such regard. A survey has to be made as to the number of passengers that would be using the station or the stoppage, the locational advantages and disadvantages have to be assessed upon field visits and studies being conducted and various other considerations go into such a decision.
5. Accordingly, the Court leaves it to the wisdom of the railway authorities to consider the representation in appropriate perspective. The petitioner is permitted to carry a fresh, detailed representation to the first respondent within four weeks from date, whereupon the first respondent will consider such material along with previous reports and recommendations, if any, and take a decision within eight weeks of the receipt of the petitioner's representation, in accordance with law.
6. Nothing in this order should be construed to be a direct or indirect attempt to persuade the railways to have a station or a halt at the place cited by the petitioner.
7. W.P.No.6936 of 2021 is disposed of without any order as to costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar tar To:
1 The General Manager Southern Railway Park Town Chennai - 600 003.
2 The Divisional Commercial Manager Southern Railway Chennai - 600 003.
3 The District Collector Kancheepuram District.
4 The Tahsildar Chengalpattu.
5 The District Collector Chengalpattu District +1 cc to M/s.P.T.Ramkumar, Advocate Sr.No. 17207 +1 cc to The Government Pleader Sr.No. 17139 +1 cc to M/s.L.Chanrakumar, Advocate Sr.No. 16939 W.P.No.6936 of 2021 SRII(CO) RMP(31/03/2021)