
Don’t meddle with traffic even for dignitaries: Madras High Court
By Express News Service | Published: 08th March 2018 02:36 AM |
Last Updated: 08th March 2018 05:15 AM | A+A A- |

For representational purpose
CHENNAI: The free flow of traffic should not be stopped for purpose of movement of vehicles of dignitaries, whether it is the Governor, Chief Minister or the Chief Justice of the High Court, the first bench of the Madras High Court has ruled.
The bench of Chief Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice Abdul Quddhose gave the ruling while disposing of a PIL petition from advocate S Doraisamy, who sought appropriate action against the traffic cops, including the top ones, for blocking the flow of traffic on the arterial NSC Bose Road for hours together for the movement of the vehicle carrying Chief Minister Edappadi K Palanisamy and his convoy to attend a public meeting at RK Nagar in connection with the by-election on March 22, 2017.
Doraisamy, whose office is situated in the YMCA building opposite the High Court on the NSC Bose Road, was to go to Neelankarai to meet a doctor. But he could not do so in view of the traffic snarl for hours. Hence, the present PIL.
The bench held that a PIL petition would not lie for punishing any person. Hence, the same is disposed of by directing the police authorities to ensure proper traffic regulation and free flow of traffic to the extent possible. As far as possible, traffic should not be stopped for more than 5 to 10 minutes or so for the purpose of movement of vehicles of high dignitaries, be it the Governor, the Chief Minister, the Chief Justice (for whom the traffic need not at all be kept awaiting) or anyone else.
Exceptions may only be made in the case of visits of high-level dignitaries such as the President of India, who occasionally visits and whose visits are intimated and publicised in advance. These directions will not prevent the police authorities from diverting traffic from certain roads in case of visit to the city of higher dignitaries such as the President and the Prime Minister of India or in other exigencies, the bench added.