Petitioner challenged a Show Cause Notice under the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act. Court allowed withdrawal in view of a subsequent confiscation order, preserving right to challenge the confiscation.
Leave granted to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to challenge the subsequent confiscation order.
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 : 21.10.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR
W.P.No.22273 of 2021 and WMP.No.23489 of 2021
Mr.R.Boopathi ...Petitioner
Vs
...Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the first respondent in Na.ka. No.326/P.Mu/Ku.Ka.Ka.ka/Ma.Vi/Tirupur/2021, dated 07.08.2021 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr. G. Murugendran For Respondents : Mr. NRR.Arun Natarajan
Government Advocate for R1 & R2
ORDER
Captioned writ petition has been filed assailing 'proceedings dated 07.08.2021 bearing reference no.Na.ka.No.326/P.Mu/ Ku.Ka.Ka.ka/Ma.Vi/Tirupur/2021 made by the first respondent' (hereinafter 'impugned proceedings' for the sake of brevity).
2. To be noted, impugned proceedings is in the nature of a 'Show Cause Notice' [SCN] inter alia under Clause 2 of the proviso to sub-Section 4 of Section 14 of 'The Tamil Nadu
Prohibition Act, 1937' (hereinafter 'said Act' for the sake of convenience and clarity).
3. Learned counsel for writ petitioner after some arguments,
submitted that it comes to light that confiscation order has since been passed. Learned counsel further submitted that the captioned writ petition has therefore become infructuous, requests for leave to withdraw captioned writ petition but seeks liberty of this Court to preserve the rights of the writ petitioner to challenge the confiscation order. Request acceded to.
4. Though obvious, it is made clear that no opinion or view
on merits has been expressed in this order and all questions are left open if the writ petitioner chooses to challenge the confiscation order.
5. Captioned writ petition and WMP are disposed of as closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS II)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
nst/kmi
To
+1CC to Mr.G.Murugendran, Advocate, Sr.No.54021
W.P.No.22273 of 2021 and WMP.No.23489 of 2021
GJ (CO)
K.RK. (01.11.2021)
Mr. R. Boopathi
The Additional Superintendent of Police, Prohibition Enforcement Division, Tirupur District
The Inspector of Police, Kangeyam Police Station, Kangeyam, Tirupur District
Velusamy
M. Sundar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
