Mr.K.Balu v. The State Of Tamilnadu,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 18.06.2018

CORAM

The HON'BLE MS.INDIRA BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE AND The HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA W.P.No.14613 of 2018 K.Balu President, Advocates' Forum for Social Justice Chennai-600 001.

.. Petitioner Vs.

1 The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by the Chief Secretary to Government Secretariat Fort St. George Chennai-600 009.

2 The Principal Secretary to the Government Home, Prohibition & Excise Department Secretariat, Fort St. George Chennai-600 009.

3 The Commissioner Prohibition and Excise Department Chepauk Chennai-600 005.

4 TASMAC Ltd.

Rep. by its Managing Director 4th Floor, CMDA Tower Gandhi Irwin Bridge, Egmore Chennai-600 008.

5 The Union of India Rep. by its Secretary to the Government Ministry of Road Transport and Highways Transport Bhawan, Parliament Street New Delhi-110 001.

6 The National Highways Authority of India Rep. by its Chairman G5 & 6 Sector-10, Dwarka New Delhi - 110 075.

.. Respondents

PRAYER: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.32, Home, Prohibition and Excise (VI) Department, dated 21.5.2018 issued by the second respondent and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Ethirajulu for Mr.M.R.Jothimanian For Respondents : Mr.R.Vijay Narayan Advocate General assisted by Mr.Satish Kumar for respondents 3 and 4 Mr.T.N.Rajagopalan Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 2

ORDER

(Made by Ms.Indira Banerjee, Chief Justice) By an order dated 23.5.2018, the Supreme Court observed that the State Government was free to give effect to the Government Order, being No. G.O.(Ms.) No.32, dated 21.5.2018, which was taken on record. The request of counsel for the first respondent before the Supreme Court, that is the writ petitioner, that the government order be given effect to after considering the reply of the first respondent (writ petitioner before us) was rejected. The penultimate paragraph of the order reads: "If the respondent No.1 is aggrieved by the stated G.O., he is free to pursue appropriate remedy, if so advised. All questions in that behalf are left open. Let the matter be listed after vacation."

2. In our view, the appropriate remedy of the writ petitioner would be before the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court being in seizin of the challenge to the government order. This writ petition is, therefore, not entertained. No costs. Consequently, W.M.P.No.17244 and 17245 of 2018 are closed.

Sd/- Deputy Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

sasi To:

1 The Chief Secretary to Government State of Tamilnadu Secretariat Fort St. George Chennai-600 009.

2 The Principal Secretary to the Government Home, Prohibition & Excise Department Secretariat, Fort St. George Chennai-600 009.

3 The Commissioner Prohibition and Excise Department Chepauk Chennai-600 005.

4 The Managing Director TASMAC Ltd.

4th Floor, CMDA Tower Gandhi Irwin Bridge, Egmore Chennai-600 008.

5 The Secretary to the Government Union of India Ministry of Road Transport and Highways Transport Bhawan, Parliament Street New Delhi-110 001.

6 The Chairman National Highways Authority of India G5 & 6 Sector-10, Dwarka New Delhi - 110 075.

+1cc to Mr.Satish Kumar, Advocate in sr.no.37223 +1cc to Government Pleader in sr.no.38087 W.P.No.14613 of 2018 nr 25/06/2018