Madras High CourtWP/18942/2022disposed of

V.Arumugam v. The District Supply Officer

2025-07-01Honourable Mr Justice N. Anand Venkatesh6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 01.07.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH V.Arumugam ..

Petitioner vs

1. The District Supply Officer Namakkal District, Namakkal.

2. The District Collector Namakkal District, Namakkal.

3. The Commissioner of Civil Supplies & Consumer Protection Department Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.

Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records of the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.2903/2021/F4, dated 14.09.2021 and quash the same and consequentially renew the retail license of the petitioner in license No.138/74.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Solomon Francis For Respondents : Mr.E.Veda Bagath Singh Special Government Pleader Page No.1 of 6

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned proceedings of the first respondent dated 14.09.2021 and for a consequential direction to the respondents to renew the retail licence of the petitioner.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he was issued licence under the Tamil Nadu Kerosene (Regulation of Trade) Order, 1973, to vend kerosene to the general public. According to the petitioner, the licence was issued to him right from the year 1974 onwards and it was renewed from time to time. The grievance of the petitioner is that all of a sudden, the first respondent came to the shop of the petitioner and affixed the impugned order in the door and only at that point of time, the petitioner came to know that an order has been passed, cancelling the license and directing the petitioner to shut down the shop. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court.

Page No.2 of 6

3. The impugned order has been passed mainly on the ground that the petitioner did not produce relevant documents to substantiate the right and title over the property where he was vending kerosene. That apart, the petitioner was directed to appear for enquiry on various occasions and the petitioner failed to attend the enquiry. Therefore, the respondents, left with no other option, cancelled the license granted in favour of the petitioner.

4. When this writ petition was entertained in the year 2022, no interim order was passed by this Court and therefore, till date, the petitioner has not continued with vending of kerosene in the absence of any license. The main reason assigned in the impugned order is that the petitioner did not properly attend the enquiry and submit the relevant documents.

5. In view of the above, it is left open to the petitioner to make fresh representation before the first respondent seeking issuance of license for vending kerosene. On receipt of the same, the first respondent shall deal with the representation in accordance with the Page No.3 of 6

Tamil Nadu Kerosene (Regulation of Trade) Order, 1973, and take a decision and inform the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the application from the petitioner.

6. This writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, W.M.P.Nos.18269, 18272 and 18273 of 2022 are closed.

01.07.2025 Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order.

Internet : Yes/No.

Index: Yes/No.

drm Page No.4 of 6

1. The District Supply Officer Namakkal District, Namakkal.

2. The District Collector Namakkal District, Namakkal.

3. The Commissioner of Civil Supplies & Consumer Protection Department Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.

Page No.5 of 6

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

drm 01.07.2025 Page No.6 of 6