N.C.Chandrasekaran v. The Executive Officer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.07.2025 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN W.P.No.10994 of 2024 N.C.Chandrasekaran S/o.Chengalrayappa, Door No. S53 , Saravana Nagar, Aalampalayam Post, Komarapalayam Taluk, Namakkal District-638 008 Petitioner Vs 1.The Executive Officer Aalampalayam Town Panchayat, Aalampalayam Namakkal District-638 008.
2.Chinnasamy, Saravana Nagar , Aalampalayam Post, Komarapalayam Taluk, Namakkal District-638 008
3.Santhi, W/o.Manikkam, Saravana Nagar , Aalampalayam Post, Komarapalayam Taluk, Namakkal District-638 008 4.Loganathan, S/o. Subramani, Saravana Nagar , Aalampalayam Post, Komarapalayam Taluk, Namakkal District-638 008 Respondents PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to take appropriate action against the power looms which are operated by the 2nd, 3rd and 4th respondents at Plot No. 40, 46 and 57 at Saravana Nagar, Aalampalayam Post, Komarapalayam Taluk, Namakkal District respectively and vacate the same from the residential area, based on the petitioner's representations dated 1.11.2022, 27.02.2023 and 23.03.2024.
For Petitioner:
Ms.S.Rithika For Respondents:
Mr.K.Karthik Jagannath Government Advocate for respondent No.1 Mr.C.Umashankar for respondent Nos.2 to 4
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) This petition, styled as Public Interest Litigation (PIL), has been filed seeking issuance of appropriate mandamus directing closure of certain activities in the nature of powerlooms allegedly being carried out in the residential area as stated in the petition.
2. Upon notice, reply has been filed by the respective respondents. While respondent No.1 has come out with a stand that an inspection was carried out on 03.06.2025 and thereafter notices have been issued to individuals on 03.07.2025, learned counsel appearing for the private respondents 2 to 4 would submit that it is the stand of the private respondents that no law requires them to obtain any such permission. He would submit that the private respondents herein are small entrepreneurs registered as MSME and the activity which is being carried out by them is of very low scale.
3. Be that as it may, the PIL has served its purpose, as respondent No.1 has already initiated action against the private respondents by issuing them notices.
4. We expect that the proceedings which have been initiated by respondent No.1 shall be brought to its logical conclusion one way or the other within a reasonable period, say three months. Respondent No.1 shall be obliged to afford an opportunity of hearing and file reply to the private respondents and then to proceed to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
5. We have not commented on the merits of the case. In case the private respondents or the PIL petitioner feels aggrieved by the order that may ultimately be passed by respondent No.1, it will be open for them to take appropriate remedy, as may be available under the law.
6. Writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ) (SUNDER MOHAN,J) 24.07.2025 Index :
Yes/No :
Yes/No bbr
To:
The Executive Officer Aalampalayam Town Panchayat, Aalampalayam Namakkal District-638 008.
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND SUNDER MOHAN,J.
bbr W.P.No.10994 of 2024 24.07.2025