Madras High Court
Natesan Theru Sirukadai Thattu vs The Secretary To Government on 1 July, 2021
W.A.No.995 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 01.07.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH
and
THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
W.A.No.995 of 2018
Natesan Theru Sirukadai Thattu
Vyabarikal Nala Sangam,
Rep. by its Secretary,
Reg.No.489/2017,
No.37, Siva Vishnu Complex,
Natesan Street,
T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017. .. Appellant
Vs
1.The Secretary to Government,
Commissionerate of Municipal Administration,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai - 600 005.
2.The District Collector,
Chennai, Rajaji Salai,
Chennai District.
3.The Commissioner,
Greater Chennai Corporation,
Ripon Buildings,
Chennai - 600 003.
4.The Commissioner of Police,
Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.995 of 2018
5.The Inspector of Police
(Law & Order),
R1, Mambalam Police Station,
No.1, Madley Road,
T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017. .. Respondents
Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order
dated 26.03.2018 made in W.P.No.4960 of 2018.
For Appellant : Mr.S.T.Varadarajulu
For Respondents : Mr.S.John J Raja Singh,
Govt. Counsel
for R1,R2,R4 & R5
Mr.M.Ganesan for R3
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.)
This appeal has been preferred by the appellant aggrieved over
the order of the learned Single Judge, who while declining to grant the
relief, observed that the appellant has not approached the Court with
clean hands.
2. Incidentally, it has been stated that the eviction has been
carried out pursuant to the orders of the Division Bench. We would like
to quote the relevant portion of the order passed by the learned Single
Judge:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.995 of 2018
"6. Learned Special Government Pleader urged that the
members of the petitioner had been evicted in order to
implement the order of the First Bench of this Court
dated 14.07.2016 and therefore the petitioner cannot
rely on the earlier order. It is further contended that
admittedly no challenge was made to the order of the
First Bench and the present writ petition filed by the
association suppressing the material facts is liable to be
dismissed with exemplary cost.
7.The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the third
respondent submitted that the petitioner-Sangam has
not come with clean hands and it is guilty of suppression
of material facts. In the affidavit, it is stated that 272
members were enrolled in the petitioner Union, but, the
information provided by the Registrar of Society,
Chennai, dated 12.3.2018, shows that the petitioner
Sangam has only 19 members.
8. In the writ petition W.P.No.4566 of 2014 filed by the
T.Nagar Residents Welfare Association, for removal of
encroachment made by Hawkers on Usman Road and
other streets in T.nagar, Chennai, the First Bench held
that hawking cannot be on the public streets and the
streets must be kept free of any encroachment by
hawkers, so that traffic movement in smooth. The order
has reached finality as no appeal was preferred against
the order.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.995 of 2018
9. Perusal of the records reveal that there is no
reference about above order either in the affidavit or in
the typed set. When the petitioner seeks relief on the
basis of the order dated 30.9.2015 passed in
W.P.No.18397 of 2014 batch, it cannot pretext saying
no knowledge about the order of the First Bench dated
14.07.2016. As rightly contended by the learned counsel
for the respondents that the petitioner has not
approached the Court with clean hands.
10. It is settled law that the party who approaches the
High Court by invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of
India shall come to the court with clean hand. If there is
any false statement or suppression of facts, on that
ground the writ petition is liable to be dismissed."
3. In light of the above, the submission made by the learned
counsel appearing for the appellant cannot be countenanced. If the
appellant has got any grievance, remedy open either to him or to its
members is to approach the Vending Committee. Admittedly, the
Vending Committee has been constituted and there is a periodical
review meeting is happening.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.995 of 2018
4. Thus, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order
passed by the learned Single Judge except giving liberty to approach
the Vending Committee, if so advised.
5. The writ appeal stands disposed of accordingly. No costs.
(M.M.S., J.) (R.N.M., J.)
01.07.2021
Index:Yes/No
mmi/ssm
To
1.The Secretary to Government,
Commissionerate of Municipal Administration,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
2.The District Collector,
Chennai, Rajaji Salai,
Chennai District.
3.The Commissioner,
Greater Chennai Corporation,
Ripon Buildings, Chennai - 600 003.
4.The Commissioner of Police,
Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.
5.The Inspector of Police
(Law & Order),
R1, Mambalam Police Station,
No.1, Madley Road, T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.995 of 2018
M.M.SUNDRESH, J.
and
R.N.MANJULA,J.
mmi
W.A.No.995 of 2018
01.07.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
