← Library
Madras High CourtWP/4591/2022ordered

M/S.Lee Blue Spa v. The State Of Tamilnadu

2022-03-02Honourable Mr Justice A.D.Jagadish Chandira4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 02.03.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA W.P.NO.4591 OF 2022 AND W.M.P.NO.4726 OF 2022 M/s.Lee Blue Spa, Represented by its Proprietor S.Vijay Anand, S/o.Selvaraj, 9/20, Nethaji Street, Near Railway Gate, Molagowndanpalayam, Erode - 638 001.

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Secretary, Home Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The Superintendent of Police, 3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, 4.The Inspector of Police, Veerappan Chatiram Police Station, Erode.

...Respondents

Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the second to fourth respondents or their men, agents from interfering with the peaceful conduct of business i.e., cross massage in the name and style of "Lee Blue Spa" at Door No.4/93, Sathi Road, Veerapathira Street 3, Erode - 638 003.

For Petitioner :

Mr.G.V.Sridharan For Respondents :

Mr.Gokulakrishnan Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to forbear the second to fourth respondents or their men, agents from interfering with the peaceful conduct of business i.e., cross massage in the name and style of "Lee Blue Spa" at Door No.4/93, Sathi Road, Veerapathira Street 3, Erode - 638 003.

2. According to the petitioner, he is carrying on business i.e., Salon and Spa, doing haircuts and provide cross massage in the name and style of "Lee Blue Spa" at Door No.4/93, Sathi Road, Veerapathira Street 3, Erode - 638 003 without giving room to any sorts of complaint or whatsoever. The petitioner business is also assessed to professional tax whereas, the fourth respondent has frequently came and interfering with the business activities of the petitioner's Salon and Spa and thereby, causing hardship to the customers for their service. In order to prevent hardship, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents would submit that the respondents are not interfering with the business activities of the petitioner.

4. This Court, in similar circumstances, following the ratio laid down by this court in the judgment report in 2015(1) MLJ 308 [Masti Health and Beauty Private limited & Others V. The Commissioner of Police, Chennai City], disposed of the Writ Petition in W.P.No.9380 of 2016, by order dated 14.03.2016, by directing the respondents-police to comply with the directions/conditions imposed in paragraph 67 of the order in the judgment reported in 2015(1) MLJ 308 (cited supra) and further made it clear that the petitioner therein under the guise of carrying on business activity shall not indulge in any unlawful or illegal activities detrimental to law and order or public order.

5. Since the issue involved in the present Writ Petition is identical to the issue involved in W.P.No.9380 of 2016, it is relevant to extract para 67 of the order passed in 2015(1) MLJ 308 (cited supra), which reads as follows:- "67. In the light of the above, all the writ petitions are disposed of to the following effect : (i) The respondents shall not, as a matter of routine and without any basis, conduct any raids and interfere with the business carried on by the petitioners;

(ii) In specific cases where the police have reasonable grounds to believe that an offence

punishable under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act has been or is being committed, it is open to the police to take action, after scrupulously following all the steps indicated in Section 15 of the said Act. The steps to be followed are narrated by me in paragraph 28 above; and (iii) Based upon the laws enacted in various States of the United States of America and Singapore, which I have dealt with in paragraphs 39 to 54, the respondents may take appropriate steps for bringing in either a new legislation or a subordinate legislation in terms of the provisions of the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act or the Chennai City Police Act, so that public order, decency and morality, which can form the basis for a regulatory law under Article 19(2) of The Constitution, are taken care of. The Government shall file a report on or before 31.3.2015, before this Court, about the decision taken. No costs. Consequently, all connected pending MPs are closed."

6. In the light of the said order, the Writ Petition is disposed of, by directing the respondents-police to comply with the directions imposed in para 67 of the order as extracted above. It is also made clear that the petitioner under the guise of carrying on business activity shall not indulge in any unlawful or illegal activities detrimental to law and order or public order.

No costs.

Consequently, connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-II) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar arb To 1.The Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, Home Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The Superintendent of Police,

3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, 4.The Inspector of Police, Veerappan Chatiram Police Station, Erode.

5.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

+1cc to M/s.G.V.Sridharan, Advocate Sr.No.13603 W.P.No.4591 of 2022 and W.M.P.No.4726 of 2022 SJ(CO) RVM(17/03/2022)