Dismissed

Thilaga Bama, v. the Principal Secretary to

Madras HC7 Aug 2017WP(MD)/10567/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking closure of a TASMAC shop. The Court declined to issue a Mandamus because the District Collector's report stated the shop was not within the prohibited distance, though it noted the petitioner could approach authorities if the shop became a perennial nuisance.

What did the court decide?

Writ of Mandamus not issued. Writ petition dismissed.

Thilaga Bama, Vs the Principal Secretary to — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 07.08.2017

¶4

CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P.[MD].No.10567of 2017 and W.M,P.(MD).No.8046 of 2017

¶5

Thilaga Bama : Petitioner

¶6

Vs.

¶7

1.The Principal Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

¶8

2.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited, CMDA Tower-II, IV Floor, Gandhi Irwin Bridge Road, Egmore, Chennai-600 008.

¶9

3.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

¶10

4.The District Manager, TASMAC, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar. : Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the third and fourth respondents forthwith to close and remove the TASMAC liquor shop No.11846, situated at No.3/252A, Sidhurajapuram, Prithivi Nagar Ayyanar Colony, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Rajkumar For Respondents : Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen, Additional Government Pleader For R1 to R3 : Mr.A.Arumugam For R4 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ ********

¶12

¶13

ORDER

¶14

[Order of the Court was made by K.K.SASIDHARAN, J.]

¶15

The petitioner filed this Writ Petition to direct the respondents 3 and 4 to close and remove the TASMAC shop NO.11846 situated at D.No.3/252A, Sidhurajapuram, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District.

¶16

The report submitted by the District Collector, Virudhunagar indicates that the shop is not located within the prohibited distance. Therefore, it is not possible for this Court to issue a Mandamus as prayed for by the Writ Petitioner. However, we make it clear that this order declining to issue the writ would not stand in the way of the petitioner from approaching the District Collector or this Court, in case the shop is a perennial source of nuisance to the people of the area in question.

¶17

The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above observation. No costs.

¶18

Sd/-

¶19

Assistant Registrar(CS-I)

¶20

/True Copy/

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶22

¶23

1.The Principal Secretary to Government,

¶24

Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

¶25

2.The Chairman,

¶26

Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited, CMDA Tower-II,

¶27

IV Floor, Gandhi Irwin Bridge Road, Egmore, Chennai-600 008.

¶28

3.The District Collector,

¶29

Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

¶30

4.The District Manager,

¶31

TASMAC,

¶32

Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

¶33

+1cc to Special Government Pleader, SR.No. 71705

¶34

ssl/tsg

¶35

MAS/SKN-RSK/SAR2:29.08.2017:2P-6C

¶36

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

¶37

Order made in W.P.[MD].No.10567of 2017 Dated: 07.08.2017

Thilaga Bama, v. the Principal Secretary to

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thilaga Bama, v. the Principal Secretary to

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Thanga Rani Vs the District Educational

A.Lourdu Packia Jeya Vs the Chief Educational Officer

V.Vishvanathan Vs the Managing Director

Thangamuthammal, Vs the Assistant Divisional

V.Mathiyas Vs the District Colletor

A.Sukumaran, Vs the District Collector