Ponnusamy, v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 07.08.2017

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN And THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE W.P.No.18781 of 2017 WMP.No.20304 of 2018 Ponnusamy ..

Petitioner vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Local Administration Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

2.The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, Rippon Buildings, Chennai-600 003.

3.The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai City Police, Vepery, Chennai-600 003.

4.The Inspector (Law and Order), J5 Police Station, Sastri Nagar, Adyar, Chennai-600 090.

5.The Executive Engineer, Chairman, Town Vending Committee, Zone XIII, Corporation of Chennai, Adyar, Chennai-600 020.

..

Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the fifth respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 07.02.2017 within a reasonable time. For Petitioner : M/s.Rohini Ravikumar For Respondents :

Mr.R.Vijayakumar, Additional Government Pleader for R1, R3 and R4 Mr.V.C.Selvasekaran for R2 and R5

O R D E R

(Order of the Court was made by M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.) By consent, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal.

2. The petitioner claims that he was running a newspaper and cool drinks vending shop at 5th Avenue, Besant Nagar, Chennai-600 090 for more than 5 years and he has no other source of income and his family is solely dependent on the income generated out of the said occupation. The petitioner would further aver that he is a registered vendor under the Tamil Nadu Street Vending Shops and Establishments workers Welfare Board established under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Manual Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Work) Act, 1982 with registration No.01SOES105246 and as such, he is entitled for protection under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending and Licensing) Scheme, 2015.

The petitioner, in this regard, has also submitted an application seeking protection under the provisions of the said Act and has also submitted a representation dated 07.02.2017 praying for enumeration as a Street Vendor and till the enumeration is done, he should be permitted to carry on the business of selling newspaper and cool drinks etc., and since no response is forthcoming, the petitioner came forward to file this writ petition.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that pending disposal of the application, the petitioner has been evicted and the same is in gross violation of Section 3 (iii) of the said Act and would further add that in similar facts and circumstances a Division Bench of this Court has directed the concerned authorities to consider the application submitted seeking protection under the said Act and till the decision is taken to defer further proceedings with regard to eviction and as such, the petitioner may be permitted to run the shop in the same location. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has also drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated 22.11.2016 made in W.P.No.35423 of 2015 [B.Arunraj v.

The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai and others -2016 SCC Online Mad 9992], wherein the Division Bench of this Court has directed conducting of necessary survey for grant of licences to the hawkers and vendors and despite such order, the said exercise is yet to be done. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would further submit that articles in the bunk shops are also seized and yet to be returned.

4. Per contra, Mr.V.C.Selvasekaran, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 2 and 5 would submit that the

petitioner is a rank encroacher and taking advantage of the provisions of the above said Act, he has made attempts to do so and therefore, he has been rightly evicted and would further add that any representation submitted by the petitioner seeking for return of articles will be dealt with in accordance with law.

5. This Court has considered the rival submissions and also perused the entire materials placed before it.

6. Though the petitioner prays for larger relief, this Court, in the light of the above facts and circumstances and without going into the merits of the same, directs the fifth respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 07.02.2017 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the decision taken, to the petitioner. The petitioner is also at liberty to submit one more representation to the respondents seeking return of the articles seized and as and when such representation is received, the fifth respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible and not later than two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

7. This Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CCC) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar To

1. The Secretary, The State of Tamil Nadu, Local Administration Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

2. The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, Rippon Buildings, Chennai-600 003.

3. The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai City Police, Vepery, Chennai-600 003.

4. The Inspector (Law and Order), J5 Police Station, Sastri Nagar, Adyar, Chennai-600 090.

5. The Executive Engineer, Chairman, Town Vending Committee, Zone XIII, Corporation of Chennai, Adyar, Chennai-600 020.

+1cc to M/s.Rohini Ravikumar,Advocate in sr.no.56608 W.P.No.18781 of 2017 RSK(CO) NR 10/08/2017