S.Manjula v. The Managing Director
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.02.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN S.Manjula .. Petitioner -vs1.
The Managing Director, The TASMAC Managing Director Office, CMDA Building 4th Floor, Egmore, Chennai 600 018.
2.
The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Mayiladuthurai District.
3.
The District Manager, Tamilnadu State Marketing Corporation Limited, The District Manager Office, Mayiladuthurai District.
.. Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith close the TASMAC Shop No.5711 situated at Mayiladuthurai to Kumbakonam State Highway, Mayiladuthurai District and by
considering the petitioner's representation dated 30.09.2205 on and for other reliefs as fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner :
Ms.S.Karpaga Lakshmi Mr.S.Siva Akash For Respondents :
Mr.K.Balakrishnan Stdg. Counsel for RR 1 and 3 :
Mr.E.Vijay Anand Addl. Govt. Pleader for R-2 * * * * *
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) This Public Interest Litigation has been filed seeking direction for closure of TASMAC Shop No.5711 situated at Mayiladuthurai to Kumbakonam State Highway, Mayiladuthurai District.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the liquor shop is situated very near to Kumbakonam, which is a place known for its religious importance. Allowing a liquor shop on the approach road to such places is affecting all those pilgrims who are approaching Kumbakonam through State Highway.
3. Learned State counsel, upon instructions, would submit that Shop No.5711 stated to be running on the State Highway is factually incorrect. He placed for our perusal a communication dated 04.02.2026 of the District Manager, TASMAC, to State counsel informing that the aforesaid shop stands closed. However, there is another shop No.5621, which is operating in the premises.
4. The petitioner, in the petition, has ventilated grievance only with regard to operation of TASMAC Shop No.5711 and not with regard to Shop No.5621.
5. Though there are no factual averments made in the affidavit, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the other shop is also situated in the same premises. The averments contained in Paragraphs 4 to 7 are as below:
"4. I respectfully submit that, a liquor shop bearing license No.5711 located in Koorainadu area, has been operating for the past few years. The liquor shop situated at near Koorainadu bus stand and primary health centre, both of which are frequently used by the general public, includes women, children and patients. Subsequently,
there is also a school is functioning near to the said liquor shop the name of the school is Raj Matriculation High School and there is also a Rotary Club High School which is located in close Proximity to this liquor shop.
5. I respectfully submit that, The Koorainadu Bus Stand serves as the main stop for students, patients, and the general public. However, due to the functioning of Liquor Shop No. 5711, the area has become unsafe and uncomfortable especially for women, school students, and patients. Individuals consuming alcohol from this shop often create public nuisance, engage in inappropriate behaviour, and disturb passers-by.
6. I respectfully submit that, further, those who consume alcohol frequently having a habit of throwing bottles in the streets. The broken liquor bottles are frequently found scattered near the bus stand, making the area hazardous and unhygienic. The shop is also located along the Mayiladuthurai-Kumbakonam Highway, leading to severe traffic congestion and reporting in frequent accidents.
7. I respectfully submit that, on a recent occasion, I personally encountered individuals under the influence of alcohol near this shop, which resulted in an unpleasant argument. Such incidents pose a serious threat to the safety and well-being of women, children, and the general public. Therefore, as a responsible citizen, it is my fundamental duty to protect and improve the natural
environment and to safeguard public property and to abjure violence."
6. If the reason for closing Shop No.5711 being one or more reasons as stated in paragraphs 4 to 7 is to be accepted, we are of the view that the authorities should consider re-locating any other shop situated in the same premises.
7. The petitioner's representation should be considered in the light of the operation of any other shop in the premises, whether it is Shop No.5621 or any other shop, keeping in view various aspects of the matter as stated in the petition.
7.1. Though, in the petition, it is not stated in so many words, during the course of arguments, parties do not dispute that the State Highway is used as approach road to a place of religious importance, that is, Kumbakonam.
8. The respondents shall take a decision within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order on the representation of the petitioner.
Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ.) (G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.) 10.02.2026 Index : Yes/No : Yes/No sra To 1.
The Managing Director, The TASMAC Managing Director Office, CMDA Building 4th Floor, Egmore, Chennai 600 018.
2.
The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Mayiladuthurai District.
3.
The District Manager, Tamilnadu State Marketing Corporation Limited, The District Manager Office, Mayiladuthurai District.
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.
(sra) 10.02.2026