N. JAGADEESAN ETC. versus DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NORTH ARCOT AND OTHERS

Citation: [1997] 2 S.C.R. 340 · Decided: 21-02-1997 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B.P. JEEVAN REDDY · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
N. JAGADEESAN ETC. 
v. 
DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NORTH ARCOT AND OTHERS 
FEBRUARY 21, 1997 
[B.P. JEEVAN REDDY AND K.S. PARIPOORNAN, JJ.) 
Constitution of India, 1950-Article 21-Right to livelihood-Removal 
of only those bunks/kiosks located within premises of hospitals and medical 
institutions for causing health hazards-Removal of bunks/kiosks located on 
C road margins of only some main busy thoroughfare for causing traffic 
hazards-Government also offering to consider applications made by the 
evicted persons for making alternative a"angements--Held : Reasons for 
removal reasonable, relevant, gennane and acceptable-Hence removal jus-
tified. 
D 
The members of the National Association of Educated Self Employed 
Youth (NAESEY) installed bunks/kiosk within the premises of hospitals 
and medical colleges and on the road margins in the cities of Madras, 
Vellore and Tiruppur in the State of Tamil Nadu. The Government of 
Tamil N adu directed the removal of these kiosks from the hospitals and 
E medical institutions as they were creating unhygienic condition and were 
posing hazard to the health and well-being of the patients and other · 
visitors. The kiosks located on the street margins were sought to be 
removed on the ground that they were proving traffic Hazard. The mem· 
bers of the Association filed writ petitions in the High Court challenging 
F 
G 
the proposed eviction by the Government to be illegal. The High Court 
dismissed the writ petitions as well as the writ appeals. The present 
appeals are filed by the aggrieved members of the Association against the 
orders of the High Court. The Association and some of the members 
directly filed writ petitions before this Court under Article 32 of the 
Constitution of the India challenging the action of the Government. 
Dismissing all the petitions and appeals together, this Court 
HELD : 1. The appellants/petitioners can have no legitimate 
grievance against the action taken to remove their bunks/kiosks in asmuch 
as the removal is confined only to hospitals and medical institutions and 
H road margins of main thoroughfares, viz., three specified thoroughfares in 
340 
-
--
-
N. JAGADEESAN v. DISTI. COLLECTOR, NO RIB ARCOT 
341 
Madras city. and one each in vellore and Tiruppur. The reasons given by A 
the State for removing them are reasonable and acceptable. It is also 
specifically averred by the State that they are not removing any bunk with 
a view to allow some other person to instal a bunk in that place. The 
removal is only for the purpose of removal of health hazard or in the 
interests of smooth and unobstructed flow of traffic. The government has B 
also offered to. consider the applications, if any, made by the evicted 
persons for locating them on other road margins or premises, as the case 
may be. Therefore, it can not be held that the reasons ·assigned by the 
Government are neither relevant, nor germane nor is it possible to say that 
the reasons are only a make-believe. (344-C-D, HJ 
c 
Sadan Singh v. New Delhi Municipal Committee, (1989] 3 SCR 1038, 
referred to. 
2. It shall be open to the persons who are evicted to apply to the 
appropriate authorities for re-location in other appropriate areas/road 
margins and the concerned authorities will consider their representations D 
and pass order thereon without any delay. 
CIVIL APPELLATE I ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal 
No. 1710 of 1987. 
From the Judgment and Order date 30.7.87 of the Madras High E 
Court in W.A. No. 1987. 
With 
Writ Petition (C) Nos. 1000, '365/87 and 677 of 1995. 
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. 
And 
Civil Appeal No. 15'36 of 1997. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 15.11.93 of the Madras High 
Court in W.P. No. 12916 of 1987. 
R. Venkataramani for the Appellants. 
Rakesh K. Sharma for the Petitioner in W.P. No. 677/95. 
F 
G 
H 
342 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1997] 2 S.C.R. 
A 
M:A. Krishnamurthy for the Respondent for State of Tamil Nadu. 
V. Balachandran for Contemnor in W.P. No. 1000/87. 
·The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
B 
B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, J. Leave granted in the Special Leave Peti-
tion. 
A common question arises in these writ petitions and civil appeals. 
The National Association of Education Self-Employed Youth 
C (NAESEY) is the petitioner in Writ Petition (C) No. 1000 of 1987. The 
appellants in Civil Appeal No. 1710of1987 and Civil Appeal No. of 1997 
(arising from Special Leave Petition (C) No. 20689 of 1993) and the writ 
peti
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.