Varadha Lakshmi v. The Commissioner Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 20.04.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN and W.M.P.No.10406 of 2023 Varadha Lakshmi

...Petitioner

Vs.

The Commissioner of Police, The Greater Chennai Police, Vepery, Chennai.

...Respondent

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for the issuance of the Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for all the records pertaining to passing of the order dated 30.09.2022 in proceeding No.RC.No.E2(1)/169/67425/2021 on the file of respondent and quash the same and further direct the respondent to issue no objection certificate to the petitioner's spa centre No.298, ECR Road, Palavakkam, Chennai-600 041.

For Petitioner : Mr.Leonard Vasanth For Respondent : Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (Criminal side)

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for all the records pertaining to passing of the order dated 30.09.2022 in proceeding No.RC.No.E2(1)/169/67425/2021 on the file of respondent and quash the same and further direct the respondent to issue no objection certificate to the petitioner's spa centre No.298, ECR Road, Palavakkam, Chennai-600 041.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner applied for grant of No Objection Certificate to run a Spa and Beauty Parlour in the name of M/s.Gratto Salon and Wellness Centre", situated at No.298, ECR Road, Palavakkam, Chennai-41. This application was rejected on the following grounds:- (i) The applicant does not possess required qualification. (ii)The masseur/masseuse do not possess required qualification. (iii) CCTV cameras are not installed as per the norms.

3. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that

the petitioner has now rectified the defects pointed out by the respondent and therefore, prays for specific order to be passed.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), appearing for the respondent submitted that if a fresh representation is given, appropriate orders will be passed.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent police.

6. In the light of the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, this Court directs the petitioner to submit a fresh representation detailing about the rectification made. On such submission of fresh representation, the respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of filing of fresh representation.

7. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs. 20.04.2023 mn Index:Yes/No Speaking Order: Yes/No

To

1. The Commissioner of Police, The Greater Chennai Police, Vepery, Chennai.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

G.CHANDRASEKHARAN.J.,

mn 20.04.2023