S.Prabakaran v. The Commissioner
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 10.03.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD S.Prabakaran ... Petitioner vs.
The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Building, Chennai. .. . Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to consider the representation dated 02.01.2025 and to setup a bunk shop to the petitioner for his livelihood at Anna Salai, Athipattnam Street, Chennai within a time frame.
For Petitioner : Mr.Charushree.P For Respondent : Mr.S.Gopinathan Standing Counsel
ORDER
By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is disposed of at the time of admission stage itself.
2. The present writ petition has been filed to direct the respondent to consider the representation dated 02.01.2025 and to setup a bunk shop to 1/4
the petitioner for his livelihood at Anna Salai, Athipattnam Street, Chennai within a time frame.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that he is a physically challenged person and running a three wheeler mobile food shop near Anna Salai for more than five years. Due to his disability, he could not able to run the said food shop regularly. Thereafter, he is getting maintenance allowance from the department of differently abled peson for the past six years and he did not receive the said amount for the past six months. Therefore, the petitioner sent a reprsentation to the reespondent dated 02.01.2025 to convert the three wheeler food shop into bunk shop in and around Anna Salai, Athipattan street. However, no action has been taken on the said representation till date. Hence, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has placed reliance on the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.27566 of 2021 dated 03.01.2022, wherein it is stated that the representation is received from the petitioner, who is a physically challenged person, the respondent Corporation can very well forward the same to the Street Vending 2/4
Committee of the concerned zone, and once it is forwarded to place it before the next street Vending Committee Metting for taking a decision thereon and the said decision can be forwarded to the Corporation for taking further follow up action in this regard.
5. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation submitted that the representation of the petitioner dated 02.01.2025 will be forwarded to the Vending Committee for taking appropriate decision.
6. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and also perused the materials available on records.
7. In view of the above submission made by the learned counsel on either side, the respondent, Corporation of Chennai is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 02.01.2025 under the provisions of the Street Vendors ( Protection of Livelihood) Protection Act, 2014 by placing the representation in the next meeting of the Street Vending Committee and on receipt of the same, the Street Vending Committee of the concerned zone shall take a decision on merits and in accordance with law, 3/4
J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD,J.
kkd and communicate the same to the respondent Corporation within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. It is neeedless to mention that depending upon the decision to be taken in the Street Vending Committee, further follow up action can be taken by the respondent Corporation. The aforesaid needful shall be undertaken by the respondent within a perioid of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
This writ petition stands disposed of with the above observation and direction. No costs.
10.03.2025 Index : Yes/No.
Internet : Yes/No.
Speaking : Non-speaking Order kkd To The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Building, Chennai. W.P.No.8089 of 2025 4/4