The High Court of Madras, a bench of Justice M. Duraiswamy, dismissed a writ petition filed under Article 226 seeking to restrain authorities from treating a shop's flex board as an illegal advertisement under the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Rules 2011, holding the prayer infructuous.
Discussed below
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: 16.12.2020
CORAM :
The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
W.P.No.27410 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.23620 of 2016
Farida Banu ...Petitioner
Vs. 1. The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, Chennai. 2. The Tahsildar, Aminjikarai Taluk, No.4, West Mada Street, Koyambedu, Aminjikarai, Chennai – 600 107. 3. The Revenue Inspector, Aminjikarai Taluk, No.4, West Mada Street, Koyambedu, Aminjikarai, Chennai – 600 107. ...Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing a writ of mandamus forbearing the respondents from interfering with the business of the petitioner as proprietrix under the name and style of “Falak Chain Under Zimson” in 100 sq.ft. shop in the 2nd floor of Door No.359, New Door No.631, EVR Periyar Salai, PH Road, Aminjikarai, Chennai – 600 107 treating the flex board in the building to the extent of 160 sq.ft., (20x8) as advertisement under the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies (Permission for Erection of Digital Banners and Placards) Rules 2011 and the said Act is illegal and arbitrary and contrary to law.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Haribabu for Mr.H.Nazirudeen For Respondents : Ms.A.Madhumathi, Special Government Pleader (R2 & R3) Mr.M.Ganesan, Standing Counsel (R1)
O R D E R
Mr.P.Haribabu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the prayer sought for in the Writ Petition has become infructuous.
2.Recording the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VII)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
va
To
1. The Commissioner,
Corporation of Chennai, Chennai.
2. The Tahsildar,
Aminjikarai Taluk,
No.4, West Mada Street,
Koyambedu, Aminjikarai,
Chennai – 600 107.
3. The Revenue Inspector,
Aminjikarai Taluk,
No.4, West Mada Street,
Koyambedu, Aminjikarai,
Chennai – 600 107.
+1cc to Mr.M.Ganesan, Advocate, SR41357
W.P.No.27410 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.23620 of 2016 CO(CP) BDL/31/12/2020
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Farida Banu
The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai
The Tahsildar
The Revenue Inspector
M. Duraiswamy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
