The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to direct the Corporation to consider his representation against issuing a merchant license without his consent. The Court found no merit as no application was pending with the Corporation.
The Writ Petition was dismissed with a direction that no order be passed as the application was not pending.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 25.01.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN
W.P. 1302 of 2019
M.Rose Mariyam ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Ripon Building, Chennai-600 003. 2.The Zonal Assistant Revenue Officer, Zone-V, Greater Chennai Corporation, No.62, Basin Bridge Road, Chennai-600 079. ... Respondents PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 22.12.2018 not to issue any license much less in the form of Merchant License or permission to any bodyelse without the petitioner's knowledge and consent.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Vijayaragavan For Respondents : Mrs.Karthikaa Ashok
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to consider the representation of the petitioner and to pass a suitable order.
2.The grievance of the petitioner is that he is the owner of the property in Old No.34, 35/1, New No.8,6, Thippu Street, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005. Now, he came to understand that some third party had filed the application with the respondentCorporation seeking for a merchant license. Hence, he made a representation before the respondent-Corporation not to grant any license without hearing him. But, the said representation
is not yet considered by the Corporation. Hence, the present writ petitioner has been filed by the petitioner.
3.Mrs.Karthikaa Ashok, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents-Corporation, on instructions, submitted that so far, they have not received any application seeking merchant license.
4.Since there is no application pending with the Corporation as of now, there is no necessity for the Corporation to pass any orders. Hence, this court finds no merit in the writ petition and the same deserves only to be dismissed.
5.With the above said observation, the present Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(J)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
gmd
To
1.The Commissioner,
Greater Chennai Corporation,
Ripon Building,
Chennai-600 003.
2.The Zonal Assistant Revenue Officer,
Zone-V,
Greater Chennai Corporation,
No.62, Basin Bridge Road,
Chennai-600 079.
+1cc to M/S.C.Neethimozhi, Advocate Sr.6128 +1cc to Mrs.Karthikaa Ashok, Advocate Sr.6614
W.P. 1302 of 2019 srg 13/02/2019
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Court should issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Corporation to consider the petitioner's representation regarding a merchant license.
Whether the Corporation has an application pending for a merchant license requiring the petitioner's hearing.
M. Rose Mariyam
The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation
The Zonal Assistant Revenue Officer, Zone-V, Greater Chennai Corporation
V. BHARATHIDASAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
