Disposed

K.Sivakumar v. The Commissioner (I/c)

Madras HC18 Jun 2021WP/25188/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged a circular restricting liquor permits. The Court held that factual adjudication by competent authorities is required to ascertain if the bar falls within the permitted area. Consequently, the Court directed the petitioner to submit a fresh representation with detailed facts, and directed the authorities to consider it expeditiously. The Writ Petition was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner to submit a fresh representation with facts and details, and the respondents to consider it expeditiously.

K.Sivakumar Vs The Commissioner (I/c) — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 18.06.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

¶5

W.P.No.25188 of 2017 and W.M.P.No.26623 of 2017

¶6

K.Sivakumar .. Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

1.The Commissioner, (I/C) Prohibition and Excise Department, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶9

2.The District Collector, Cuddalore District, Cuddalore.

¶10

3.The Assistant Commissioner (Excise), Prohibition and Excise Department, Cuddalore, Cuddalore District.

¶11

4.The Senior Regional Manager, TASMAC, Cuddalore, Cuddalore District. .. Respondents

¶12

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to extend the benefits of the communication issued by the 1^st respondent in his letter No. P & E 2 (4) / 12740 / 2016, dated 01.09.2017 for reopen the petitioner's bar and permit room situated at S.K.Guest House, Vandigate, Opp : Telephone Exchange, Cuddalore Main Road, Chidambaram, Cuddalore District consequently directing the 4^th respondent to supply the liquors to the petitioner's S.K.Guest House.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Prakasam For RR 1 to 3 : Mr.V.Nanmaran For R4 : Mr.K.Sathish Kumar

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The circular issued by the Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise Department to all the District Collectors in letter dated 01.09.2017 is under challenge in the present Writ Petition. The

¶16

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

¶17

impugned circular was issued based on the Hon'ble Supreme Court order.

¶18

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner states that there are subsequent developments and clarifications issued and accordingly in certain areas bar is permitted as per the clarifications. The case of the petitioner falls under the clarifications and therefore, the petitioner is entitled for the relief.

¶19

3.This Court is of the considered opinion that the case of the petitioner requires a factual adjudication before the authorities competent to ascertain whether the bar is proposed to be run within the area, where permission is especially granted. Such factual details deserves an adjudication, which cannot be undertaken in a Writ mandates under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India. Thus, the petitioner is at liberty to submit a fresh representation stating out all the facts and details along with the clarifications, Government Orders and judgments and in the event of receiving any such representation, the respondents are directed to consider the same and pass orders as expeditiously as possible.

¶20

4.With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶21

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS-VII)

¶22

//True Copy//

¶23

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶24

krk

¶25

¶26

1.The Commissioner, (I/C) Prohibition and Excise Department, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶27

2.The District Collector, Cuddalore District, Cuddalore.

¶28

3.The Assistant Commissioner (Excise), Prohibition and Excise Department, Cuddalore, Cuddalore District.

¶29

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

¶30

4.The Senior Regional Manager, TASMAC, Cuddalore, Cuddalore District.

¶31

+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.28510

¶32

W.P.No.25188 of 2017

¶33

PMK(CO) CB(22/07/2021)

¶34

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

K.Sivakumar v. The Commissioner (I/c)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Sivakumar v. The Commissioner (I/c)

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

M/S.Vijayalatha and Co., Vs Union of India

M/S Amruthajyothi Finance Vs Union of India

M/S.Reliance Communications Vs the State of Tamilnadu

Mrs.C.Anitha, Vs Income Tax Officer

Schneider Electric Systems India Pvt. Ltd., Vs The Secretariat

Dr.a.Ravishankar, Vs Chennai Metropolitan