← Library
Madras High CourtWP/6901/2017disposed of

Sundaravadivel v. The Commissioner Of Sugars

2017-03-22Honourable Mr Justice D. Krishnakumar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 22.03.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR WP.No.6901 of 2017 and WMP.No.7495 of 2017 Sundaravadivel

...Petitioner

..Vs..

1.The Commissioner of Sugars Anna Salai Nandanam, Chennai-600 035.

2.Madurantakam Cooperative Sugar Mills Rep. by Special Officer Madurantakam, Kancheepuram District.

3.S.V.Sugars Limited Presently called as M/s.Padmadevi Sugar Mills Limited Rep. by its Managing Director Walajabad, Kancheepuram District.

4.The District Collector Kancherrpuram District, Kancheepuram.

...Respondents

Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of mandamus, to direct the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 03.03.2017 and direct the 1st respondent to grant permission to the 2nd respondent Cooperative Sugar Mills for registering the cane from 5 firqas viz., Kaliampoondi, Kanavakkam, Thirupulivanam, Uthiramerur, Arumbuliyur for the crushing season commencing from 2017-18 and in future in terms of the earlier order dated 06.04.2016 in R.C.No.13479/Cane1/2015. For Petitioner :

Mr.R.Rajarajan For Respondents :

Mrs.T.Girija Government Advocate

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

2. According to the petitioner, he made a representation dated 03.03.2017 to the 1st respondent to grant permission to the Madurantakam Cooperative Sugar Mills for registering the cane from 5 firqas viz., Kaliampoondi, Kanavakkam, Thirupulivanam, Uthiramerur, Arumbuliyur for the crushing season commencing from 2017 - 18 and in future in terms of the earlier order dated 06.04.2016 in R.C.No.13479/Cane1/2015. The said representation has not been considered by the 1st respondent, therefore the petitioner filed the present petition.

3. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents submitted that even the present writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking for the relief as prayed for in the public interest, this Writ Petition is not maintainable.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also taking into account the limited scope of the prayer sought for by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to go in to the merits of the case. However, taking into consideration the allegations made in the representation, this Court directs the 1st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 03.03.2017, on merits and in accordance with law and after providing opportunities to the parties concerned, and to pass orders, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner is directed to enclose a copy of the representation dated 03.03.2017 along with the copy of this order to the first respondent.

5. The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

To 1.The Commissioner of Sugars Anna Salai Nandanam, Chennai-600 035.

2.The Special Officer, Madurantakam, Cooperative Sugar Mills, Madurantakam, Kancheepuram District.

3.The Managing Director, S.V.Sugars Limited, Presently called as M/s.Padmadevi Sugar Mills Limited Walajabad, Kancheepuram District.

4.The District Collector Kancherrpuram District, Kancheepuram.

+1cc to Mr. G. Rajan, Advocate Sr. 17887 +1cc to the Government Pleader Sr. 18681 WP.No.6901 of 2017 VR(27/03/2017)