M.Maheswari v. The Managing Director
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATE: 09.09.2015
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN W.P.No.28288/2015 & MP.No.1/2015 M.Maheswari ... Petitioner Vs
1. The Managing Director Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable TV Corporation Ltd., No.11/22, Mankadusamy Street Nungambakkam, Chennai.
2. The Special Tahsildar Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable TV Corporation Ltd., Erode District.
3. The Multi System Operator Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable TV Corporation Erode District.
.. Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a writ of mandamus, to direct the respondents to give protection to the petitioner for the subscriber list as per the enquiry conducted on 01.07.2015 to 03.07.2015. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Sundaravadhanan For Respondents : Mr.Abdul Saleem
O R D E R
By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.
2.The petitioner claims that she is the Proprietor of Mahesh Cable Vision at Gobichettipalayam and the 1st respondent, after its formation, invited tenders from persons interested in working as Licensed Cable Operators in the respective areas. Accordingly, the petitioner had participated and she was given a license with License No.18610 and one of the conditions is that the infrastructure cost for receiving the signal from the 3rd respondent will have to be borne by the petitioner. As per the procedure, signal received from the 3rd respondent has to be boosted up by installing a junction box and from there, the petitioner has to effect connections to various subscribers and while routing connections through common places, necessary permission from the concerned authorities will have to be obtained for putting up cable wires.
The petitioner would claim that she is regularly paying all the dues to the 1st respondent and it is her claim that the subscriber base had increased by 600 and the petitioner, in this regard, has approached the respondents to make inspection with regard to the increase in subscription base, so as to enable her to pay the license fees and provide cable TV connection to them and accordingly, the inspection was also done between 01.07.2015 and 03.07.2015. Thereafter, nothing had happened and in this regard the petitioner has also submitted a representation dated 24.08.2015 to the 2nd respondent and since no orders have been passed, the petitioner came forward to file this writ petition. 3.Heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.
Abdul Saleem, learned counsel who accepts notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3.
4.Though the petitioner has prayed for a larger relief, this Court, taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances and without going into the merits of the claim projected by the petitioner, directs the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 24.08.2015 on merits and in accordance with law and pass orders within a period of four weeks thereafter and communicate the decision taken, to the petitioner herein.
5.The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. -Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True copy// Sub Assistant Registrar AP To
1. The Managing Director Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable TV Corporation Ltd., No.11/22, Mankadusamy Street Nungambakkam, Chennai.
2. The Special Tahsildar Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable TV Corporation Ltd., Erode District.
3. The Multi System Operator Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable TV Corporation Erode District.
+1cc to A.Sundaravadhanan,Advocate(sr.49896) W.P.No.28288/2015 sk(co) cp 29/09/2015