Dismissed

M.Gandhi v. The District Collector

Madras HC20 Mar 2024WP(MD)/6323/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Licence holder of a TASMAC bar's bottle-collection and eatables right sought a mandamus to prevent shifting of TASMAC Shop No.7621. The court found no specific allegation and noted shop location depends on public wishes; it dismissed the petition with liberty to claim damages for auction investments.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to claim damages from respondents 2 and 3 for any investment made pursuant to the public auction.

M.Gandhi Vs The District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.6323 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 20.03.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.6323 of 2024

¶7

and

¶8

W.M.P(MD) No.5918 of 2024

¶9

M.Gandhi ... Petitioner

¶10

Vs.

¶11

1.The District Collector, Sivagangai,

¶12

Sivagangai District.

¶13

2.The Managing Director,

¶14

Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation TASMAC, CMDA Complex, Egmore, Chennai-600 008.

¶15

3.The District Manager,

¶16

The Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited (TASMAC), Narikuruvar Colony, Thondi Road, Palamalai Nagar, Soorankulam Village, Sivagangai. ... Respondents

¶17

Prayer :- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

¶18

praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from shifting the TASMAC Shop No.7621 from Puliyadithambam

¶19

_________ Page 1 of 5

¶20

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶21

W.P.(MD) No.6323 of 2024

¶22

Village, Devakottai Circle, Sivagangai District, till the expiry of the existing license period.

¶23

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Rajeshkumar For R1 : Mrs.D.Farjana Ghoushia Special Government Pleader For R2 & R3 : Mr.H.Arumugam

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The petitioner has filed this writ petition for a mandamus forbearing the respondents from shifting the TASMAC Shop No.7621

¶26

from Puliyadithambam Village, Devakottai Circle, Sivagangai District, till the expiry of the existing licence period.

¶27

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner got a licence for the right to collect empty bottles and to sell eatables at the bar attached to TASMAC shop No.7621. The said licence was issued to the petitioner pursuant to the public auction conducted on 07.02.2024.

¶28

The petitioner has quoted a sum of Rs.82,400/- and he was declared to be

¶29

_________ Page 2 of 5

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

W.P.(MD) No.6323 of 2024

¶32

the highest bidder. At the instance of some political parties, the respondents 2 and 3 are attempting to shift the TASMAC shop from Puliyadithambam Village to some other place. This attempt is made in order to satisfy the political persons and also to allot the licence for the right to collect empty bottles and to sell the eatables to the benami of the politician.

¶33

The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 and 3 submitted that in view of the objection of the public, the respondents 2 and 3 are now intending to shift the TASMAC shop to some other place and they have already made a proposal to the District Collector in this regard and the same is pending.

¶34

Though the petitioner has made certain allegations that the respondents 2 and 3 are attempting to favour the third party, the petitioner has not made any specific allegation against anybody. Moreover, it is the policy of the TASMAC to run the shop depending upon the wish of the surrounding peoples. In view of the same, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition. Accordingly, this Writ

¶35

_________ Page 3 of 5

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶37

W.P.(MD) No.6323 of 2024

¶38

Petition is dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to claim damages as against the respondents 2 and 3, if he has invested any amount pursuant to the public auction. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶39

20.03.2024

¶40

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No cp

¶41

To The District Collector, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

¶42

Page 4 of 5

¶43

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶44

W.P.(MD) No.6323 of 2024

¶45

B.PUGALENDHI,J

¶46

¶47

W.P.(MD)No.6323 of 2018

¶48

Dated: 20.03.2024

¶49

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶50

_________ Page 5 of 5

M.Gandhi v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Gandhi v. The District Collector

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

Sakhla .N.M Vs The Tamil Nadu Waqf Board

Boominathan Vs The District Collector

Arul Jothi Vs The Regional Transport Authority

K.Sayira Begam Vs The Regional Transport Officer

A.Palanisamy Vs The Regional Transport Officer

D Selvan Vs The District Collector