K.Kalimuthu, v. The Managing Director,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.10.2018
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR W.P.[MD]No.10263 of 2015 K.Kalimuthu : Petitioner Vs.
1. The Managing Director, Madurai Region, Byepass Road, Madurai.
2. The Managing Director, Tuticorin Region, Byepass Road, Tuticorin.
3. The General Manager, Virudhunagar Division, Virudhunagar.
4. The Branch Manager, Kovilpatti, Tuticorin District.
: Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to operate a bus service in the rural route connecting Kovilpatti to Srivilliputtur via Naduvapatti, Elayiram Pannai, Vembakottai, Alangulam, Perumalthevanpatti and thereby reducing hardship of our locality.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Thirunavukkarasu For Respondents 1 & 3 : Mr.A.Jeyaram Standing Counsel For Respondent No.2 : Mr.K.Sathya Singh Standing Counsel
O R D E R
************ [Order of the Court was made by M.M.SUNDRESH,J.] The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are not providing adequate bus service in the rural route connecting Kovilpatti to Srivilliputhur via Naduvapatti, Elayiram Pannai, Vembakottai, Alangulam, Perumalthevanpatti, etc,. 2.In the counter affidavit filed by the third respondent, it is stated as follows:
"7.I submit that it is not possible to provide the bus facilities for the individual personal interest and further we can consider the petitioner's request only through the Government approval and on the basis of report of the economically viability and other requirements such as potentialities of the routes are required for the new route sanction. The sector of the route is mentioned in this writ petition is commonly covered by our TNSTC (Madurai) Ltd Corporation and our sister Corporation namely TNSTC (Tirunelveli) Ltd Corporation by covering the important places in the route requested already transport facilities are provided and hence the Writ Petition is not maintainable."
3.This Court cannot take the role of the respondents and pass an order. However, taking into consideration of the fact that this counter affidavit was filed way back in the month of September 2015, the writ petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file fresh representation to the third respondent. As and when the said representation is made, the same may be considered on merits.
4.The Writ Petition stands disposed of, accordingly. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AD-I) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-II) To
1. The Managing Director, Madurai Region, Byepass Road, Madurai.
2. The Managing Director, Tuticorin Region, Byepass Road, Tuticorin.
3. The General Manager, Virudhunagar Division, Virudhunagar.
4. The Branch Manager, Kovilpatti, Tuticorin District.
+ 1 CC TO Mr.M.THIRUNAVUKKARASU, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 91712 MR TE/SV/SAR-2 : 23/11/2018 : 3P/6C ORDER MADE IN W.P.[MD]No.10263 of 2015 25.10.2018