SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 65242

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
V. Lakshminarayanan, J
B.RAMESH – Appellant
Versus
THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT – Respondent
W.P.No.43127 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms. D.Tamilsundar
For the Respondents: Mr. L.S.M.Hasan Fizal, Mr. Kishore Kumar, Mr.D.B.R. Prabhu

The court affirmed that the petitioner can seek alternative remedies even after a dismissal.

Headnote:The petitioner, a physically challenged individual, sought permission to set up a petty shop under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. The court observed the reported non-vending status of the proposed area and directed that the petitioner apply to the Regional Deputy Commissioner (North) for consideration to establish a push cart at a designated vending area. The petition was ultimately dismissed with liberty to approach the authorities for further requests.

Table of Content
1. consideration for vending area application (Para 1 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. notice to newly impleaded respondent (Para 2 , 3)
3. court ruling on the writ petition dismissal (Para 7)

ORDER

The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Chennai, is suo moto impleaded as sixth respondent by this Court today ie., on 12.11.2025.

2. Registry is directed to carry our necessary amendment in the Writ Petition by impleading the above said respondent as sixth respondent.

3. Mr.D.B.R. Prabhu, learned counsel takes notice for the newly impleaded sixth respondent.

4. Mr.D.B.R. Prabhu, learned counsel for the sixth respondent reports that the area which the petitioner seeks to install a bunk shop is a non vending area.

5. I notice that the petitioner is a physically challenged person. Hence, I requested Mr.D.B.R. Prabhu, learned counsel for the sixth respondent to verify whether there are any vending areas near by the petitioner and the petitioner can file an application for placing his push cart.

6. Mr.D.B.R. Prabhu, learned counsel for the sixth respondent reports that the vending area in the place nearby to the petitioner's place request is Puduagaram road. He gives an assurances to this Court that if the writ petitioner makes an application to the Regional Deputy Commissioner (North), the application will be considered and appropriate orders will be passed.

7. Recording the above said statement, this Writ Petition stands dismissed giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Regional Deputy Commissioner (North) for seeking permission to install a push cart at the notified vending area.

12.11.2025 vsg Neutral Citation : Yes / No To

1. The Secretary to the Government Department of Welfare of Differently Abled Persons Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

2. The District Collector Chennai District, Thiruvallur – 600 001.

3. The State Commissioner of the Welfare of Differently Abled Persons Kamarajar Salai, Willingdon College, Chennai – 600 005.

4. The Principal Secretary Government of Tamil Nadu Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TANGEDCO)

Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

5. The Additional Commissioner of Police (Traffic and Headquarters Administration)

Avadi Police Commissionerate, Chennai – 600 054.

6. The Commissioner Greater Chennai Corporation, Chennai.

V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN , J.

vsg W.P.No.43127 of 2025

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top