Y.Mary Josephine v. The State Of Tamilnadu
2026:MHC:1762 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 20.05.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Y.Mary Josephine ... Petitioner vs.
1.The State of Tamilnadu, Represented by the District Collector, Kanyakumari District, Kanyakumari.
2.The Regional Transport Officer, Marthandam RTO, Kanyakumari District.
... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the Respondents to permit the petitioner to operate the stage carriage services covered under Permit Nos.20/TN74Z/2006 and 15/TN74Z/2005 by using the vehicles bearing Registration Nos. TN-74-Y-2930 and TN-74-Y-0716 through the temporary diversion route from Thuckalay Bus Stand to Monday Market Bus Stand via Alangode and Moiylodu (Ottangodu), during the subsistence of the ongoing road widening and railway overbridge construction works and consequently permit the petitioner to continue operation through the said diversion route pending such consideration, 1/5
based on the petitioner's representation, dated 09.05.2026 within the stipulated time fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner :Mr.J.Bebin Jose For Respondents :Mr.M.Gangatharan Government Advocate *****
O R D E R
The Writ Petition is filed to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to operate the stage carriage services covered under Permit Nos.20/TN74Z/2006 and 15/TN74Z/2005 by using the vehicles bearing Registration Nos. TN-74-Y-2930 and TN-74-Y-0716 through the temporary diversion route from Thuckalay Bus Stand to Monday Market Bus Stand via Alangode and Moiylodu (Ottangodu), during the subsistence of the ongoing road widening and railway over bridge construction works and consequently permit the petitioner to continue operation through the said diversion route pending such consideration, based on the petitioner's representation, dated 09.05.2026 within the stipulated time fixed by this Court.
2.The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that when the petitioner has duly got a permit, without any justification whatsoever, 2/5
in the alternate routes, the petitioner's plying is interfered with and therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court. 3.When the matter came up for admission, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf the respondents, by placing reliance on the written instructions issued to him, would submit that the road widening work between Nelliyarkonam to Kakadu is over and the vehicles are now being permitted in the said route. Similarly railway bridge works are not undertaken in the route originally permitted to the petitioner. Therefore, it is submitted that the petitioner can operate the buses in the original routes, for which, the permit was granted to the petitioner. The same is recorded.
4.Since it is now represented that there is no impediment for the petitioner to ply the buses, as per the original permit, recording the same, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. NCC :Yes / No 20.05.2026 cmr 3/5
To 1.The District Collector, The State of Tamilnadu, Kanyakumari District, Kanyakumari.
2.The Regional Transport Officer, Marthandam RTO, Kanyakumari District.
4/5
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
cmr 20.05.2026 5/5