← Library
Madras High CourtWP/44339/2016disposed of

K.Sivakumar v. The District Collector

2017-07-13Honourable Mr Justice M.Duraiswamy4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 13.07.2017

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY W.P.Nos.44339 to 44343 of 2016 and W.M.P.Nos.38207 to 38211 of 2016 K.Sivakumar [ Petitioner in W.P.No.44339/16 ] M.Sivakumar [ Petitioner in W.P.No.44340/16 ] V.Saravanan [ Petitioner in W.P.No.44341/16 ] B.Thirumalai [ Petitioner in W.P.No.44342/16 ] R.Murali [ Petitioner in W.P.No.44343/16 ] Vs 1 The District Collector Kancheepuram Kancheepuram District 2 The Director, Elcot Ltd.

Sholinganallur Medawalkam Main Road (After toll gate) Chennai 600119 [ Respondents] Petitions filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of mandamus forbearing the 2nd respondent from denying the petitioners to ply their auto bearing registration numbers TN 11 Z 7250, TN 07 BJ 4087, TN 05 AJ 7779, TN 14 F 1694 and TN 07 R 2376 respectively along the pathway of about 2 km from the Karappakkam roadside up to the back gate entrance of several software companies situated at Sholinganallur area within a time frame.

For Petitioners : Mr.K.Ravi Anantha Padmanaban For Respondents : Mr.S.V.Doraisolaimalai AGP (R1) Mr.Vijayan for M/s Kiing & Patredge (R2)

C O M M O N O R D E R Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

2. The petitioners have filed the above writ petitions to issue writs of mandamus forbearing the 2nd respondent from denying them to ply their autos bearing registration numbers TN 11 Z 7250, TN 07 BJ 4087, TN 05 AJ 7779, TN 14 F 1694 and TN 07 R 2376 respectively along with the pathway of about 2 km from the Karappakkam roadside up to the back gate entrance of several software companies situated at Sholinganallur area, within a time frame.

3. According to the petitioners, they have been using the pathway for the past five years only for the purpose of dropping and picking up the software employees especially women employees who stay in the nearby women's hostels and at paying guest houses. Further, the petitioners submitted that without assigning anyreason and without any opportunity, the 2nd respondent has restrained them from dropping and picking up the employees. In these circumstances, the petitioners have filed the writ petitions seeking for issuance of mandamus.

4. Since the petitioners are seeking to enter the 2nd respondents campus, I am of the view that only the 2nd respondent has to take a decision as to whether they can allow the petitioners to enter the campus or not.

5. In these circumstances, the petitioners are given liberty to give representations to the 2nd respondent and in such an event, the 2nd respondent shall consider and take a decision on the petitioners representations, within a period of four weeks from the date of submission of the representations, in accordance with law. With these observations, the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 13.07.2017 rg To The District Collector Kancheepuram Kancheepuram District

M.DURAISWAMY, J.

rg W.P.Nos.44339 to 44343 of 2016 13.07.2017