D.Balasundaram, v. The Managing Director,
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 22.9.2017 Coram :
The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM Writ Petition No.25530 of 2017 D.Balasundaram
...Petitioner
Vs 1.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited (TASMAC), CMDA Tower - 2, Fourth Floor, Gandhi Irwin Bridge Road, Egmore, Chennai - 8.
2.The District Collector, Vellore District, Vellore.
3.The District Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited (TASMAC), Vellore.
...Respondents
PETITION under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first and third respondents to vacate the wine shop which was reopened illegally in the petitioner's premises in Ward No.1, Block No.3 in survey No.201 and 195/1A in Vellore Town. For Petitioner : Mr.D.Rajagopal For Respondents 1 & 3 : Mr.Arumugha Rajan For Respondent 2 : Mrs.M.Lalitha, GA
O R D E R
Heard Mr.D.Rajagopal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Arumugha Rajan, learned Standing Counsel accepting notice for respondents 1 and 3 and Mrs.M.Lalitha, learned Government Advocate accepting notice for the second respondent. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.
2. The petitioner has let out a shop for running a retail vending liquor shop by the respondent Corporation. It appears https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
that the shop was closed on account of the orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
3. The petitioner would state that for five months, the shop was kept locked and possession was handed over to him. Subsequently, after the clarifications issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the shop has now been opened. The petitioner alleges that the lock has been broken.
4. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation submits that possession of the shop was not handed over to the petitioner and that the possession continued with the respondent Corporation.
5. The dispute between the petitioner and the respondent Corporation is purely a landlord-tenant dispute, which cannot be adjudicated in a writ petition. Therefore, the prayer sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.
7. In any event, since the petitioner has already submitted a representation to the first respondent dated 06.9.2017 seeking to direct their officials to vacate the shop, the first respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 06.9.2017 on merits and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS V) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Managing Director, TASMAC, CMDA Tower-2, Fourth Floor, Gandhi Irwin Bridge Road, Egmore, Chennai - 8. 2.The District Collector, Vellore District, Vellore. 3.The District Manager, TASMAC, Vellore.
+1cc to Mr.P.Arumugarajan, Advocate Sr. 70301 +1cc to the Government Pleader Sr. 70612 +1cc to Mr.D.Rajagopal, Advocate SR. 71094 WP.No.25530 of 2017 AR(V) VR(24/10/2017) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/