1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.11.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.BASHA and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL Writ Petition (MD) No.11207 of 2011 and M.P.(MD).Nos.1 & 2 of 2011 P.Pethu Rajesh ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The District Collector cum The Regional Transport Authority, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi. 2.The Regional Transport Officer, Thoothukudi. 3.The Commissioner, Thoothukudi Corporation, Thoothukudi. ... Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the proceedings of the first respondent in his proceeding R.No.3243/B1/10 dated 30.08.2011 with regard to the modification, by deleting the conditions imposed in paragraph-4 of the 1st respondent's earlier proceedings in Na.Ka.No.E3-37165/B3/99 dated 16.10.1999 and thereby issuing a direction for not enabling the moffusil buses coming from Northern side of Thoothukudi to reach the old bus-stand and setting down the passenger during the hours between 6.00 p.m. and 6.00 a.m. and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 to enable the moffusil buses coming from northern side of Thoothukudi to reach the old bus- stand and thereby set down the passenger during the hours between 6.00 p.m. and 6.00 a.m. For petitioner .. Mr.P.Pethu Rajesh (Party-in-person) For respondents .. Mr.R.Anandharaj, Government Advocate https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 ORDER (Order of the Court was made by K.N.BASHA, J) The challenge in this writ petition is to the order, dated 30.08.2011, passed by the first respondent and consequential relief of a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to enable the moffusil buses coming from northern side of Thoothukudi to reach the old bus-stand and thereby set down the passengers during the hours between 6.00 p.m. and 6.00 a.m. 2.The petitioner is a practising advocate and he has come forward with this petition as public interest litigation as he hails from Tuticorin Town and the matter is relating to the convenience of the general public at large for using the transport facility of the buses plying from Madurai to Tuticorin and Kovilpatti to Tuticorin, etc. The petitioner himself appeared as a party-in-person and contended that there are two bus-stands in the Tuticorin City viz., the old bus-stand named as "Aringar Anna Bus stand", situated at the southern side, which is the heart of the city and the new bus-stand, situated at northern side of Tuticorin City, which is in the outer area of the city. It is contended that earlier, buses, plying towards southern side and western side of the City, would depart from Tuticorin old bus-stand and on return journey, would arrive at the same bus-stand viz., the old bus-stand. Likewise, the buses, plying towards northern side of the City, would depart from new bus-stand and on return journey, would arrive at the same bus-stand viz., the new bus-stand. It is pointed out that in between 6.00 p.m. and 6.00 a.m., in order to effectuate the passengers, who are forced to prefer night journey, it was decided earlier by the first respondent, as per the order dated 16.10.1999, that the buses, coming from the places situated at the northern side of the city, would proceed into the city, in order to leave the passengers at the new bus-stand as well as to the old bus-stand. The petitioner would also submit that the said system was introduced in order to reduce the threat and risk faced by the people at the hands of the antisocial elements and criminals. It is contended that there were instances of chain snatching, robbery and other criminal offences committed during such time. The petitioner would also submit that an order was passed in W.P.(MD).No.8554 of 2008 on 04.12.2008 directing the first and third respondents herein to implement the earlier order, dated 16.10.1999, in its letter and spirit. 3.The petitioner would further submit that thereafter, at the instance of certain bigwigs, who are having their business concerned in and around the new bus-stand at Tuticorin, the first respondent was proposed to change the movements and operation of the buses from old bus-stand to new bus-stand and a writ petition was preferred before the Principal Bench by the District Consumer Protection Peravai and the Principal Bench passed an order, dated 31.08.2010, directing the respondents not to alter the movements prevailing in the existing scheme viz., 1999 scheme and further directed the first respondent to decide the said issues in accordance with law, after hearing all the relevant parties. However, after https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 enquiry, the first respondent passed an order, dated 30.08.2011, modifying the earlier order, dated 16.10.1999, in respect of the movement of buses by deleting the operation of enabling the moffusil buses coming from northern side of Tuticorin to reach the old bus- stand and setting down the passengers from 6.00 p.m. to 6.00 a.m., mainly on the ground of availability of public service conveniences, like Mini Buses, Taxies and Auto-rickshaws. Being aggrieved against the said order, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition. 4.It is contended by the party-in-person that the reasons assigned for deleting or modifying the earlier scheme resulting in the removal of plying the buses upto the old bus-stand even from 6.00 p.m. to 6.00 a.m. resulted great hardship to the public at large, as many of them cannot afford to take the other alternative services, like Mini Buses, Taxies and Auto-rickshaws. It is contended that on the other hand, no prejudice would be caused for retaining the old scheme of plying the buses even during the hours of 6.00 p.m. to 6.00 a.m., upto the old bus stand viz., Aringar Anna Bus-stand. It is pointed out by the petitioner that even as per the counter filed before this Court by the respondents 1 & 2, nearly 70 buses arriving at Tuticorin only during the crucial houses of 6 p.m. to 6.a.m. and passengers, who are arriving at odd hours are facing great hardship for travelling from new bus-stand to their respective places, apart from facing the threat of chain snatching, robbery and other criminal activities by the antisocial elements. Therefore, it is contended that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and consequently, the old scheme is to be re-modified and restored. 5.Per contra, Mr.R.Anandharaj, learned Government Advocate would vehemently contend that there is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order passed by the District Collector. It is contended that the impugned order was passed only considering the public conveniences. It is pointed out by the learned Government Advocate that from 6.00 p.m. onwards, there will be hectic traffic and plying the buses upto old bus-stand would cause great hardship to the public and may result in frequent accidents as the roads are very narrow for going inside the city upto old bus-stand viz., Aringar Anna Bus- stand. It is also contended that only after conducting full-fledged enquiry and after enquiring public as well as the representatives of the public, the impugned order was passed by the District Collector and as such, there may not be any real or genuine grievance to the public, in respect of modifying the old scheme by stopping the buses from new bus-stand to old bus-stand. 6.We have given our careful and anxious consideration to the rival contentions put forward by either side and also perused the impugned order passed by the first respondent herein and other materials available on record. 7.At the outset, it is to be stated that the transport buses are plying right from 1999, from Madurai to Tuticorin as well as from Kovilpatti to Tuticorin upto the old bus-stand viz., Aringar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4 Anna Bus-stand. It is pertinent to note that a new bus-stand was established subsequently and the same is situated at the outskirts of Tuticorin city. It is seen that as per the order of the first respondent, dated 16.10.1999, the buses were plying from Madurai as well as from Kovilpatti stopped not only at the new bus-stand but also at the old bus-stand. We are able to see much force in the contention put forward by the petitioner to the effect that stopping the buses upto the new bus-stand would cause great hardship and serious threat to the general public during odd hours. It is very difficult for them to face the risk of anti-social elements committing offences like, chain snatching, robbery, etc. 8.The perusal of the impugned order, dated 30.08.2011, would make it abundantly clear that the first respondent thought it fit to modify the earlier order passed on 16.10.1999 by deleting the portion relating to plying of buses from Madurai to Tuticorin as well as from Kovilpatti to Tuticorin upto the old bus-stand from 6.00 p.m. to 6.00 a.m. only on the ground of availability of public conveniences viz., Mini Buses, Taxies and Auto-rickshaws. We are of the considered view that the common people cannot afford to engage Taxi or Auto-rickshaw and to make further expenses by way of purchasing tickets in Mini Bus, on the other hand, no prejudice would be caused to the transport corporation for plying and stopping the buses during 6.00 p.m. to 6 a.m. upto the old bus-stand viz., Aringar Anna Bus-stand at Tuticorin city. 9.The perusal of the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, however, reveals that 70 buses were arriving only during the time of 6.00 p.m. to 6.00 a.m. Though it is pointed out by the learned Government Advocate that the impugned order was passed, after having detailed discussions and conducting enquiry, consisting not only the public but also the representatives of the several association, it is seen that in the impugned order itself, it is recorded that most of them preferred to retain the status quo, in respect of plying all the buses upto the old bus-stand. 10.In view of all these factors, we are of the considered view that the impugned order passed by the first respondent, dated 30.08.2011, is unsustainable in law. Hence, we are constrained to allow the writ petition and set aside the impugned order passed by the first respondent, dated 30.08.2011. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the order, dated 30.08.2011, passed by the first respondent is set aside and consequently, the first respondent is hereby directed to restore the earlier order, dated 16.10.1999. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Crl.Side) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5 To: 1.The District Collector cum The Regional Transport Authority, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi. 2.The Regional Transport Officer, Thoothukudi. 3.The Commissioner, Thoothukudi Corporation, Thoothukudi. +1cc to Mr.P.Pethu Rajesh, Advocate Sr.No.41166 +1cc to the Special Govt.Pleader, Sr.No.41247 gcg ssk/09.12.2011 /6c-5p/- Order in W.P.(MD)No.11207 of 2011 23.11.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/