E.Palanisamy Vs The Commissioner of Prohibition and excise

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider petitioner’s representation dated 12.09.2024 and 22.10.2024 to cancel FL2 license granted to Sri Vinayaha Social Welfare Club.

¶15

For Petitioner(s): Mr.J.Franklin For Respondent(s): Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan Special Government Pleader (for R1) Mr.V.Parthiban (for R2 and R3)

¶16

Page 1 of 4

¶17

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

¶18

W.P. No.8511 of 2026

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan, the learned Special Government Pleader, takes

¶21

notice for R1 and Mr.V.Parthiban, the learned counsel, takes notice for R2 and R3.

¶22

By consent of learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶23

The present writ petition is filed praying for a writ of Mandamus to direct the first respondent to consider petitioner’s representation dated 12.09.2024 and 22.10.2024, to cancel FL2 license granted to Sri Vinayaha Social Welfare Club.

¶24

Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan, learned Special Government Pleader for the 1st respondent would submit that the representation submitted by petitioner would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed after affording the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of hearing, in accordance with law within the time period to be fixed by this Court.

¶25

In view of the same, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the limited relief sought for in this Writ Petition,

¶26

Page 2 of 4

¶27

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

¶28

W.P. No.8511 of 2026

¶29

there shall be a direction to the first Respondent to consider the petitioner's representations, on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, respondents 2 and 3 and other interested persons, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any views with regard to the merits of the representation and it is open to the concerned respondent to consider the representations on its own merits and in accordance with law.

¶30