Ambattur Developers Pvt.Ltd v. State Of Tamil Nadu
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 04.9.2017 Coram :
The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM Writ Petition No.18356 of 2017 & WMP.No.19929 of 2017 Ambattur Developers Pvt. Ltd., rep.by its Executive Vice President, Chennai-58.
...Petitioner
Vs 1.State of Tamil Nadu, rep.by the Principal Secretary, Department of Prohibition & Excise, Fort.St.George, Chennai-9.
2.The Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, Park Town, Chennai-3.
3.The Taluk Excise Officer, Guindy Taluk, Chennai-32.
4.The District Collector, No.62, Rajaji Salai, Chennai-1.
...Respondents
PETITION under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records in connection with the order of the third respondent in their letter Lr.No.E/15/2017 dated 19.4.2017, quash the same and consequently forbear the respondents from interfering with the petitioner's FL3 License. For Petitioner : Mr.P.S.Raman, SC for Mr.C.Seethapathy For Respondents : Mr.S.T.S.Murthy, AAG assisted by Mrs.A.Srijayanthi, SGP
ORDER
Heard Mr.P.S.Raman, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner.
2. The petitioner seeks to quash the proceedings of the third respondent and consequently forbear the respondents from interfering with the petitioner's FL3 License.
3. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Arrive Safe Society of Chandigarh Vs. Union Territory of Chandigarh and another [S.L.P. (Civil) No.10243 of 2017] dated 11.7.2017, clarified the position as to whether the earlier orders would have an impact in respect of the bars situated within the municipal areas. The clarification issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is to the following effect :
"The purpose of the directions contained in the order dated 15.12.2016 is to deal with the sale of liquor along and in proximity of highways properly understood, which provide connectivity between cities, towns and villages. The order does not prohibit licensed establishments within municipal areas. This clarification shall govern other municipal areas as well. We have considered it appropriate to issue this clarification to set at rest any ambiguity and to obviate repeated recourse to IAs, before the Court."
4. In the light of the above, there can be no impediment for the petitioner to carry on its activities in terms of the licence granted by the Excise Authorities.
5. The learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents would submit that the above direction issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been implemented and that the petitioner has been permitted to commence their vending operations in the licensed premises.
6. In the light of the subsequent development, no further orders are required.
7. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the above WMP is also dismissed. Sd/- Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar RS
To 1.The Principal Secretary to the Government of of Tamil Nadu, Department of Prohibition & Excise, Fort.St.George, Chennai-9.
2.The Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, Park Town, Chennai-3. 3.The Taluk Excise Officer, Guindy Taluk, Chennai-32. 4.The District Collector, No.62, Rajaji Salai, Chennai-1. +1cc to M/S C.Seethapathy, Advocate Sr.64459 WP.No.18356 of 2017& WMP.No.19929 of 2017 SAI(CO) rvr 03/10/2017