Madras High CourtWP/8471/2023closed

S.R. Bhagyalakshmi v. The Commissioner

2025-03-14Honourable Mr Justice J.Sathya Narayana Prasad7 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 14.03.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD and W.M.P.No.8673 of 2023 S.R.Bhagyalakshmi

...Petitioner

-Vs1.The Commissioner Grater Chennai Corporation, Ripon Building, E.V.R. Salai, Chennai- 600 003.

2.The District Revenue officer Regional officer (Zone 10), Greater Chennai Corporation, No.117, N.S.K. Salai, Kodambakkam, Chennai-600 024 3.The Sanitary Inspector Health Department, Greater Chennai Corporation, Saligramam, Chennai- 600 093 4.Sebastian Julia Mary Christiana

...Respondents

1/7

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a direction in the nature of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the license on the file of the respondent dated 29.12.2022 issued under Section 287 of CCMC Act 1919 issued by the 1st respondent and quash the same and to consider the representation dated 0302.2023.

For Petitioner :

Mr.L.Infant Dinesh For Respondents :

Mr.Ragul Adhitya for Mrs.P.T.Ramadevi Standing Counsel for R1 to R3

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed seeking to call for the license on the file of the respondent dated 29.12.2022 issued under Section 287 of CCMC Act 1919 issued by the 1st respondent and quash the same and to consider the representation dated 0302.2023.

The brief facts of the case are as follows:

2.The petitioner is a landlord of a shop located in Arunachalam 2/7

road, Saligramam, Chennai, which she had rented out to the 4th respondent for commercial and office purpose in the name of ''Cake World''. An agreement of lease was entered between the parties on 01.01.2019 for 11 months upto 30.11.2019.

2(i). The official respondents 2 and 3 came to know that the 4th respondent failed to renew the food license for the said cake shop as a result of which, the Municipal Corporation closed and sealed the tenancy premises of the 4th respondent on 26.12.2022. The 4th respondent was dispossessed from the premises after which the petitioner has sent a representation to the 1st respondent seeking to break open the seal and hand over the premises to her. She received a reply on 24.01.2023 from the 2nd respondent stating the shop seal was revoked on 29.12.2022. The 4th respondent has obtained a trade license under the header of ''New license'' on 29.12.2022. 2(iii). The petitioner aggrieved that the 4th respondent has run the business without proper license, which has now been given back to the 4th 3/7

respondent by way of granting license without valid proper documents, alleges that the 2nd respondent may have colluded with the 4th respondent. Hence, she has filed the present writ petition. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the writ petition is filed to quash the license dated 29.12.2022 issued to the 4th respondent under Section 287 of Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919, issued by the 1st respondent by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 03.02.2023.

4.Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the 4th respondent was running a bakery without lease deed from the petitioner and the respondent without verifying the same and issued license dated 29.12.2022 and he has filed the writ petition to quash the same. 5.The learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 /corporation submitted that the 4th respondent has vacated the premises in 4/7

September 2024. Hence, nothing survives in this writ petition. 6.Counter filed by the learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 3. 7.Accordingly, this Writ petition stands closed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

14.03.2025 vsn Index : Yes / No Speaking / Non-Speaking Order 5/7

To 1.The Commissioner Grater Chennai Corporation, Ripon Building, E.V.R. Salai, Chennai- 600 003.

J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD, J.

vsn and W.M.P.No.8673 of 2023 14.03.2025 7/7