Madras High CourtWP/4342/2019disposed of

Vgn Property Developers Pvt Ltd., v. The Regional Deputy Commissioner

2019-02-15Honourable Mr Justice D. Krishnakumar4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15.02.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR W.P.No.4342 of 2019 VGN Property Developers Pvt. Ltd.

Represented by its Authorised Signatory, Mr.A. Rangappan .... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Regional Deputy Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, No.36/12B, 2nd Cross Street, Pulla Avenue Road, Shenoy Nagar, Chennai - 600 030.

2. The Superintending Engineer, Greater Chennai Corporation, No.36/12B, 2nd Cross Street, Pulla Avenue Road, Shenoy Nagar, Chennai - 600 030.

3. Zonal Officer, Greater Chennai Corporation, No.1, 4th Cross Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034.

4. Executive Engineer, Greater Chennai Corporation, No.1, 4th Cross Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034.

5. Assistant Executive Engineer, Greater Chennai Corporation, No.8, Lake Area, Nungambakkam, Chennai.

6. Assistant Engineer Ward No.111, Thiruveedian Road, Gopalapuram, Chennai - 600 086.

7. Ramu ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 6 herein to take immediate action under Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919 and remove the illegal / unauthorised shops put by the 7th respondent at the entrance and exit gate of the petitioner's company situated at No.153, Wallace Garden, 2nd Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 006, based on the petitioner's representation dated 28.12.2018. For Petitioner : Mr.C. Karthik Senior Counsel for A.Umasankar For Respondents : Mrs.Karthika Ashok Standing Counsel for RR1 to 6

ORDER

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

2. According to the petitioner, the 7th respondent is running unauthorised bunk shops selling all prohibited items viz., cigarettes, gutka, pan masala etc. As such, the 7th respondent is causing hindrance to access their company, by blocking their entrance. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation, dated 28.12.2018 to the respondents 1 to 6 seeking for removal of the aforesaid bunk shops and the same was not considered. Hence, it would suffice, if a direction is issued to the 3rd respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

3. Mrs. Karthika Ashok, learned Standing Counsel taking notice for the respondents 1 to 6, has no objection in granting such relief to the petitioner.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court, without going into the merits of the matter, directs the 3rd respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 28.12.2018, on merits and

in accordance with law, and pass appropriate orders, after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5.With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To