Pathaiya Ponnu v. The Divisional Engineer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 11.07.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN W.P(MD) No.18760 of 2025 and W.M.P(MD) No.14391 of 2025 Pathaiya Ponnu ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Divisional Engineer, Highways Department, Madurai - 2.

2.The Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Madurai - 2.

3.The General Manager, Madurai District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Limited, Sivagangai Main Road, Sathamangalam, Virudhunagar District.

...Respondents

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to restore the petitioners Aavin Booth retail shop at State Highway Madurai - Natham Road Kilometre 1/400 and to permit the petitioner to run her as per license Aavin Booth retail shop as per the license granted by the 1st respondent in his proceedings Ka.En.935/2024/Ee.Va.2/dated 23.05.2024 and to pay Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) as compensation for the damages 1/8

caused to the petitioner's Aavin Booth by the respondent Nos.1 and 2. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Rajamohan For R1 : Mr.D.Ghandiraj Special Government Pleader For R2 : M/s.S.Devasena, Standing Counsel For R3 : Mr.K.Prabhu

ORDER

This Writ Petition is disposed of at the time of admission after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent.

2. The petitioner claims to have obtained a license from both the Highways Department and Aavin for running a aavin milk booth. However, pursuant to the order passed by this Court, a drive was made by the first respondent to remove the encroachment on the public places.

3. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the first respondent that, although the petitioner was licensed to vend Aavin products, the petitioner 2/8

was, in fact, vending flowers, which is contrary to the terms of the license obtained by the petitioner.

4. The learned counsel for the third respondent also confirms that the petitioner's last purchase was only five litres of milk, and it is evident that the said quantity was not intended for retail sale, for which the petitioner had obtained a license from the Highways Department and the third respondent.

5. That apart, it is informed that the license issued by the Highways Department to the petitioner has also expired. Be that as it may, since the petitioner has been removed from the place, where the petitioner was carrying on his business, the Court had directed the learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent to report as to whether the petitioner can be rehabilitated to any other suitable location. In response, the first respondent, vide letter, dated 10.07.2025 has agreed to an alternate site to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions. The contents of the said letter are extracted hereunder: 3/8

4/8

5/8

6. Since the first respondent are willing to accommodate the petitioner at the alternate site, the first respondent is directed to do so in accordance with the aforesaid letter, dated 10.07.2025. It is open to the petitioner to make a living from the said place, if he so desires.

7. With the above direction and liberty, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs. 11.07.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Indu 6/8

To 1.The Divisional Engineer, Highways Department, Madurai - 2.

2.The Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Madurai - 2.

3.The General Manager, Madurai District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Limited, Sivagangai Main Road, Sathamangalam, Virudhunagar District.

7/8

C.SARAVANAN, J.

Indu W.P(MD) No.18760 of 2025 11.07.2025 8/8