Petitioner sought a mandamus to process his crackers licence applications. The first respondent rejected the applications on 28.11.2024 pending the petition; counsel conceded the prayer had become infructuous. The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous with liberty to challenge the rejection 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.
W.P.No.16521 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED :04.12.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR
W.P.No.32210 of 2023 and WMP.Nos.31822 of 2023 and 34984 of 2024
P.Selvakumar
..... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Revene Officer, Kancheepuram District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram District.
3.The District Officer, Fire Safety and Rescue Services, Chennai Suburban District, Ambattur, Chennai – 58.
..... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1 st respondent herein to
1/4
W.P.No.16521 of 2021
process the license application dated 02.11.2023 and 07.11.2023 for grant of crackers license within stipulated time period as may be fixed by this Court and consequently direct the 2 nd respondent to remove the sealed premises at No.34, Pallavaram Main Road, Karaimangar, Kundrathur, Chennai – 69.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Sundaravadanam
For Respondents :Mr.S.Balamurugan Government Advocate O R D E R
Mr.T.Sundaravadanam, learned counsel on record for
petitioner appearing through video conference submits that the prayer
in the writ petition is to direct the first respondent to process the licence
application dated 02.11.2023 and 07.11.2023 for grant of crackers
licence. The first respondent passed an order dated 28.11.2024
rejecting the application of the petitioner. Therefore, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the prayer in the writ petition has become infructuous and the said statement is recorded. The writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.
2/4
W.P.No.16521 of 2021
2. It is open to the petitioner to challenge the order passed
by the first respondent in accordance with law. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
04.12.2024
Index : Yes/No Speaking order:Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes/No ub To 1.The District Revene Officer, Kancheepuram District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram District.
3.The District Officer, Fire Safety and Rescue Services, Chennai Suburban District, Ambattur, Chennai – 58.
3/4
W.P.No.16521 of 2021
S.SOUNTHAR, J.
ub
W.P.No.32210 of 2023
04.12.2024
4/4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the court should direct processing of the petitioner's crackers licence applications dated 02.11.2023 and 07.11.2023.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
P.Selvakumar
The District Revene Officer, Kancheepuram District
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram District
The District Officer, Fire Safety and Rescue Services, Chennai Suburban District, Ambattur, Chennai – 58
S.Sounthar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
