Karthickraja v. The State Of Tamilnadu

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02.04.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Mr. Karthick Raja

...Petitioner

Vs

1. The State of Tamilnadu Represented by The commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Building, Chennai - 600 003.

2. The State of Tamil Nadu Represented by., The Zonal Commissioner Division - 127, Zone -10, Chennai Corporation, Kodambakkam, Chennai - 600024.

3. The State of Tamil Nadu Represented by., The Revenue Officer Chennai Corporatio, Kodambakka, Chennai- 600 024.

4. The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by., The Assistant Revenue Officer Division - 127, Zone 10, Chennai Corporation, Kodambakkam, Chennai - 600 024 1/5

5. The State of Tamil Nadu Represented by The License Inspector, Chennai Corporation, Kodambakkam, Chennai 600 024.

6. Mr. Arunachalam

...Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents Nos. 1 to 4 to consider the representation dated 27.01.2024 consequently direct the respondents No.1 to 5 to take action against the 6th respondent unlicensed shop in the manner known to law and pass orders. For Petitioner : Mr.N. Thamzhanban For Respondents 1 to 5 : Mrs.P.T. Ramadevi Standing counsel

ORDER

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

2. This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 4 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 27.01.2024.

2/5

3. The case of the petitioner is that the sixth respondent is operating a flour mill at No.17/61, Vengatesh Nagar, 2nd Street, Virugambakkam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600 092 in the name of "Sri Ayyanar Flour Mill". The grievance of the petitioner is that due to the operation of the said mill the residents of the said area are greatly affected as there was a noise pollution, hygiene issues etc.,. Hence the petitioner gave a representation to the respondents 1 to 4 to consider their case and pass favourable orders. However, the same was not considered. Hence this petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it would be suffice if this Court issues a direction to the respondents 1 to 4 to consider the petitioner's representation and pass orders.

5. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 submits that the representation of the petitioner will be considered on merits and in accordance with law.

3/5

6. Considering the facts of the case, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case directs the respondents 1 to 4 to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass orders within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. This writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs. 02.04.2024 Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order smn To

1. The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation,Rippon Building, Chennai - 600 003.

2. The Zonal commissioner Division - 127, Zone -10,Chennai Corporation, Kodambakkam, Chennai - 600024.

3. The Revenue Officer Chennai Corporation,Kodambakkam, Chennai- 600 024.

4. The Assistant Revenue Officer Division - 127, Zone 10, Chennai Corporation, Kodambakkam, Chennai - 600 024

5. The License Inspector, Division - 127, Zone - 10,Chennai Corporation, Kodambakkam, Chennai 600 024.

4/5

V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J.

smn W.P.No.8755 of 2024 02.04.2024 5/5