M.Vijayabharathi v. The District Manager

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 04.02.2022

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN W.P.NO.1634 OF 2022 (Through Video Conferencing) M.Vijayabharathi, S/o.Malaiyarasan

...Petitioner

Vs.

The District Manager, TASMAC Limited, Tiruvallur East District, Tiruvallur.

...Respondent

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to consider the and dispose the representation of the petitioner dated 15.01.2022 on merits.

For Petitioner :

Mr.Manokumar for Mr.M.Manimaran For Respondent :

Mr.K.Sathish Kumar Standing Counsel

ORDER

Mr.K.Sathish Kumar, learned Standing Counsel takes notice on behalf of the respondent.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.

3. Earlier, a batch of writ petitions were disposed in W.P.Nos.27352 of 2021 etc batch vide its order dated 31.01.2022, challenging the Tender Notification dated 14.12.2021 bearing reference in Na.Ka.No.A3/2242/2021.

4. In the aforesaid detailed order, this Court has come to the conclusion that neither the petitioners who are the existing licensees can arm-twist the respondents TASMAC to give business to them under the 2003 Rules nor TASMAC can be seen by giving https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

permissions/licenses for these businesses and thereby allow the consumers to violate Section 4A of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937 and seen in the state of intoxication in public place.

5. In view of the above order passed by this Court, I do not find any merits in the present writ petition. Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed with the above observations. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar arb To The District Manager, TASMAC Limited, Tiruvallur East District, Tiruvallur.

W.P.No.1634 of 2022 KJ(CO) RVM(25/02/2022) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/