Disposed

T.Mani v. the District Collector

Madras HC5 Jul 2017WP/18509/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Benign order disposing of a writ petition where the High Court, noting an existing interim injunction, directed the respondent authorities not to interfere with the petitioner's licensed manufacturing and sale of Ayurvedic preparations without adhering to due legal process.

What did the court decide?

The respondent authorities shall not interfere with the petitioner's licensed Ayurvedic business without following due process of law, reiterating the existing interim injunction.

T.Mani Vs the District Collector — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated : 05.07.2017

¶3

Coram

¶4

The Hon'ble Mr.Justice T.S.Sivagnanam

¶5

Writ Petition No. 18509 of 2004

¶6

and W.P.M.P.No.22054 of 2004

T.Mani

...Petitioner

Vs.

The District Collector, Nagercoil, Kaniyakumari District, 2. Superintendent of Police, Nagercoil, Kaniyakumari District.

¶11

...Respondents

¶12

This Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from interfering with the petitioner's right to manufacture and sell (i) Kanakasavam, (ii) Jeerakarishttam, (ii) Asokarishttam, on the basis of the license issued to the petitioner under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations Excise Duties Act.

¶13

For Petitioner : M/s.V.S.Manimekalai For Respondents : M/s.A.Srijayanthi

¶14

Special Government Pleader.

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

Heard M/s.V.S.Manimekalai, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and M/s.A.Srijayanthi, learned Special Government Pleader, for the respondent.

¶17

The petitioner claims himself to be the owner of Ayurvedi Pharmacy, and he has been issued a licence by the Drugs Controller. However, since there was obstructions and hindrances caused by the Police Officials and the District Administration, preventing the petitioner from carrying on the above said business, the petitioner approached this Court, by way of this Writ Petition, to forbear the respondents from interfering with his right to manufacture and sell (i) Kanakasavam, (ii) Jeerakarishttam, (ii) Asokarishttam, on the basis of the licence

¶18

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

¶19

issued to the petitioner under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations Excise Duties Act.

¶20

The Writ Petition was admitted and an order of interim injunction was granted on 03.09.2004, and the said order of interim injunction is still in force, and so far, the respondent have not filed counter affidavit. Therefore, the Writ Petition stands disposed of, with an observation that, as long as the petitioner has valid licence and complies with the conditions of the licence, the Ayurvedi business carried on by the petitioner shall not be interfered by the respondent, without following due process of law. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶21

s/d-
Assistant Registrar(CS-III)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
sd
To
1. The District Collector,
Nagercoil, Kaniyakumari District,
2. The Superintendent of Police,
Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.

¶22

Writ Petition No. 18509 of 2004

¶23

KK(CO) sp(20/07/2017)

¶24

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

T.Mani v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.Mani 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Elumalai Vs The Commissioner of Customs

Thajudeen, Vs The District Collector

Trade Links Vs Assistant Commissioner (Ct)

M/S.Kali Aerated Water Works Vs the Joint Commissioner of

Mohanlal Ojha Vs the Deputy Commercial Tax

The State of Tamil Nadu, Vs Tvl.Cherry Blossom Clothing