Disposed

R.Sangeetha, W/o.Ramesh, v. The District Collector

Madras HC9 Oct 2014WP/20235/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition challenged the location of a TASMAC shop alleging violation of liquor vending rules and nuisance. The court found no violation of prohibited distance rules and disposed of the petition, reserving the option for the first respondent to initiate nuisance proceedings if substantiated.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition was disposed of with no costs awarded.

R.Sangeetha, W/o.Ramesh, Vs The District… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 09.10.2014

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN

¶5

W.P.No.20235 of 2014

¶6

R.Sangeetha .. Petitioner vs 1.The District Collector, Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai. 2.Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd., (TASMAC) Rep. by its Managing Director, CMDA Tower - II, 4th Floor, Gandhi Irwin Bridge Road, Egmore, Chennai. 3.The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC), CMDA Tower - II, 4th Floor, Gandhi Irwin Bridge Road, Egmore, Chennai.

¶7

4.The District Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC), Tiruvannamalai District. .. Respondents

¶8

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to shift the TASMAC Shop No.9541 situate at Tiruvannamalai to Harur State Highways, Kolamanjanur Village, Thandarampattu Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District to any other place out of the Village Limit and State Highway.

¶9

For Petitioner .. Mr.S.Ambigapathi

¶10

For Respondents.. Mr.S.T.S.Moorthy, Govt. Pleader, Assisted by Mr.I.Inbadurai, Spl. G.P., for R1 .. Mr.S.Muthuraj for RR2 to 4

¶11

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

(Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶14

The petitioner is aggrieved by the location of the Tasmac shop in the village, which is alleged to be contrary to Rule 8 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Liquor Retail Vending (in Shops and Bars) Rules, 2003, qua the distance from the place of worship. It is also the case of the petitioner that nuisance is created in the area.

¶15

2.The counter-affidavit filed by the fourth respondent / Tasmac denies the allegations and states that the Tasmac Vending Outlet has been in existence for more than three years and there is no temple within the vicinity of the said shop and thus, there is no violation of the prohibited distance under Rule 8 (1) as aforesaid. In fact, the allegation is of a personal duel between the petitioner and the building owner where the tasmac shop is located.

¶16

3.In view of the aforesaid stand, no direction can be passed for removal of the shop, but, if there is nuisance created, proceedings can be initiated under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in view of the judgment of this Court in T.N.State Marketing Corporation Ltd. vs. R.M.Shah, (2010) 8 MLJ 304.

¶17

4.As far as another petty shop stated to be in vicinity is concerned, the stand of the 4^th respondent is that F.I.R. has been registered qua the same, which is authorised to sell only cool drinks, etc., though the case of the petitioner is that the petty shop is also selling liquor unauthorisedly. This aspect will be closely monitored by the first respondent / District Collector, to ensure adherance to law.

¶18

5.Writ Petition, accordingly, stands disposed of. No costs.

¶19

Assistant Registrar

¶20

//True Copy//

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶22

sra

¶23

¶24

1.The District Collector, Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai.

¶25

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶26

2.The Managing Director, TASMAC, CMDA Tower - II, 4th Floor, Gandhi Irwin Bridge Road, Egmore, Chennai. 3.The General Manager, TASMAC, CMDA Tower - II, 4th Floor, Gandhi Irwin Bridge Road, Egmore, Chennai. 4.The District Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC), Tiruvannamalai District.

¶27

1 cc to Mr..S.Muthuraj ,Advocate, SR.No.8418 1 cc to Mr. S.Ambigapathi,Advocate, SR.No.48085 1 cc to Government Pleader,Sr.No.48725 W.P.No.20235 of 2014 RK(co) pmk.28.10.2014

¶28

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

R.Sangeetha, W/o.Ramesh, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Sangeetha, W/o.Ramesh, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Board of Trustees of the Vs the Madras Steamer Agents Assc

R.Muthukumar Vs The State of Tamilnadu

K.R.Ramaswamy alias Traffic Vs The Secretary

Jitendra R.Patel Vs The Member Secretary

Radha Kandasamy, Vs The District Collector

T.Prema, Vs The Collector