Madras High CourtWP(MD)/3281/2013disposed of

E.Athisayakumark v. The Commissioner,

2015-08-17Honourable Ms.Justice V.M.Velumani,Honourable Mr Justice R. Sudhakar3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:17.08.2015

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR AND THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI W.P(MD).No.3281 of 2013 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2013 E.Athisayakumar .. Petitioner Vs.

1. The Commissioner, Thoothukudi Corporation, Thoothukudi.

2. The Mayor, Thoothukudi Corporation, Thoothukudi.

3. The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

4. The Dean, Thoothukudi Government Medical College, Hospital, Thoothukudi.

5. The Director, Town & Country Planning Department, Chennai.

.. Respondents Writ Petition is filed Under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to writ of Mandamus, forbearing the Respondents 1 & 2 from constructing any compound wall on the western side of the Rajaji Park blocking the temporary road to the Thoothukudi Government Hospital from Palayamkottai Main Road till such time the proposed road along the eastern side of the Rajaji Park is laid and become functional.

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai For R1 : Mr.S.Saji Bino For R2 to R5 : Mr.M.Alagadevan Spl. Govt. Pleader

ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by V.M.VELUMANI, J] The petitioner has filed this writ petition for writ of

mandamus forbearing the Respondents 1 & 2 from constructing any compound wall on the western side of the Rajaji Park blocking the temporary road to the Thoothukudi Government Hospital from Palayamkottai Main Road till such time the proposed road along the eastern side of the Rajaji Park is laid and become functional. 2.According to the petitioner, General Public for a long time using the road through Court Complex to reach the Government Hospital, Tuticorin. A six stories building was constructed for the hospital so as to accommodate 500 beds. After completion of said six stories building, the Public Works Department closed the road through Court complex.

3.On the western side of the Court complex Rajaji Park is situated. It was proposed to lay a road to a breath of 40 feet and length of 121 feet on the Eastern side of the park. A temporary road was laid.

4.The Municipal Council of first respondent Corporation passed a resolution, dated 27.04.2005 to this effect and resolved to lay a 40 feet road. In spite of resolution passed, the first respondent not laid the 40 feet road as proposed. Now, the first respondent is constructing a compound Wall on Eastern side of the Park. By construction of such compound Wall, 40 feet road will become 10 feet road and only pedestrian can use the road and no vehicle can pass through the said road. The petitioner gave a representation to the respondents 1 and 2. In such circumstances, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

5. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the respondents and perused the materials on record.

6.The petitioner has not stated whether first respondent has proceeded with construction of compound Wall and completed the same or not. Further, the petitioner has given representation in the year 2013 to the respondents 1 and 2.

7.Considering the facts of the case, it will be sufficient, if the first respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass orders. If the petitioner is still having any grievance in this regard, it is open to the petitioner to give a fresh representation to the first respondent. If such representation is given, the first respondent is directed to consider the same and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law.

8.With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also

closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Per.Admn) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To