| |
CDJ 2026 MHC 404
|
| Court : Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court |
| Case No : W.P.(MD). No. 1558 of 2026 & W.M.P.(MD). Nos. 1221 & 1223 of 2026 |
| Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY |
| Parties : K. Selvarani Versus The Regional Transport Authority cum District Collector, Tiruchirappalli & Another |
| Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: A.C. Asaithambi, Advocate. For the Respondent: K. Balasubramani, SGP. |
| Date of Judgment : 22-01-2026 |
| Head Note :- |
| Constitution of India - Article 226 - |
| Summary :- |
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Article 226 of the Constitution of India
2. Catch Words:
- Writ of Certiorari
- Writ of Mandamus
- Extension of route
- Representation
3. Summary:
The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking certiorari and mandamus to quash an order that restricted buses without a terminus at Central Bus Stand from operating at the new Punjappur Bus Stand. The respondent argued that the petitioner must first apply for an extension of its route to include Punjappur. The Court observed that the petitioner indeed needs to make such a representation before the authority. Accordingly, the Court directed the petitioner to file an application for route extension and instructed the respondent to consider it and pass appropriate orders. No substantive relief was granted; the petition was disposed of without cost, and related miscellaneous petitions were closed.
4. Conclusion:
Petition Dismissed |
| Judgment :- |
|
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order issued by the 1st respondent vide his proceedings in Se.Mu.No.50337/A2/2024 in order No.7, 2nd Parat (Town Bus Service) dated 14.07.2025 and quash the same as illegal and consequently directing the respondent permit the petitioner to operate here stage Carriage bearing Registration No.TN48-T-1213 from Central Bus Stand to Punjappur Kalaignar Bus Stand (Via) Mannarpuram and for other reliefs.)
1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 14.07.2025 passed by the respondent.
2. Mr.K.Balasubramani, learned Special Government Pleader, takes notice on behalf of the respondents.
3. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in this case, the petitioner, being the Town Stage Carriage Operator, is operating in the route from Srirangam to EVR College via Central Bus Stand. Under these circumstances, the Central Bus Stand was shifted to a new bus stand called Punjappur. Due to the said shifting, the respondent, vide the impugned order, directed that only the buses, which have terminus at Central Bus Stand, shall operate from the Punjappur Bus Stand. However, the petitioner is not having terminus at Central Bus Stand but they are running via Central Bus Stand, due to which, they are not allowed to operate/enter the Punjappur Bus Stand. Hence, this writ petition.
5. In reply, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent would submit that for the aforesaid relief, the petitioner has to file an application before the respondents seeking for extension of route from Central Bus Stand to Punjappur Bus Stand and from Punjappur Bus Stand to EVR Bus Stand. If any such application is filed, the same will be considered and appropriate orders will be passed by the respondent. Hence, he requests this Court to pass appropriate orders.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and and the learned Special Government Pleader for the respondent and also perused the materials available on record.
7. In the case on hand, it is clear that the respondent, vide the impugned order, had issued a direction that only the buses, which have terminus at Central Bus Stand, shall operate from the Punjappur Bus Stand. As stated above, the petitioner is not having terminus at Central Bus Stand but they are running via Central Bus Stand, due to which, they are not allowed to operate/enter the Punjappur Bus Stand.
8. When such being the case, as rightly suggested by the Special Government Pleader, the petitioner has to necessarily make a request before the respondents for extension of route from Central Bus Stand to Punjappur Bus Stand and from Punjappur Bus Stand to EVR Bus Stand. In such case, this Court directs the petitioner to make an application/ representation for extension of route as stated above.
9. At this juncture, it was submitted by the petitioner that he will make such request as stated above. However, if the said request is not considered by the respondent, the footfall will get reduced, due to which, the interest of the petitioner will get affected.
10. In view of the above, this Court directs the respondent to consider the representation/application, to be filed by the petitioner, and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.
11. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No cost. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.
|
| |
