M/S.Luminas India Associates v. The Commissioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 04.07.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM W.P.No.15476 of 2018 and W.M.P.No.18357 of 2018 M/s.Luminas India Associates, Rep.by its Proprietor Paul Raj Anthony, Apeejay Business Centre, No.39/12, Haddows Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 006. ... Petitioner

Versus

1.The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Building,Chennai - 600 003.

2.The Convenor, Committee rep.by its Convenor, Deputy Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Building, Chennai - 600 003.

... Respondents Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the 9 applications filed individually for 9 hoardings covered under one proceeding No.A7/29381/2014, License No.23-33/2015 by 9 covering letters dated 29.1.2018 for the hoardings owned by the petitioner, the details of which is described in the schedule in the writ petition and consider the same and pass appropriate order by renewing the license.

For Petitioner : Mr.B.S.Gnanadesikan Senior Counsel for M/s.Gnanadesikan Law Association For Respondents: Mr.T.C.Gopalakrishnan Standing counsel

O R D E R

Heard Mr.B.S.Gnanadesikan, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr.T.C.Gopalakrishnan, learned Standing counsel for the respondents.

2.This writ petition has been filed seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the 9 applications filed individually for 9 hoardings covered under one proceedings No.A7/29381/2014, License No.23-33/2015, by 9 covering letters dated 29.1.2018.

3. The learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the respondents have granted licence to the petitioner and even before the expiry of the time, applications have been submitted to renew the licence, however, so far, no orders have been passed. It is further stated that, it would suffice, if a suitable direction is given to the respondents to consider the applications of the petitioner.

4.The learned Standing counsel for the respondents submitted that the second respondent is the competent authority and he is ready to consider the applications of the petitioner in accordance with law.

5. In the light of the above submissions and also considering the limited scope of prayer sought for in this writ petition, this Court, without going into the merits of the case directs the second respondent to consider the applications of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity to all the necessary parties within a period six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time the respondents shall not take any coercive action against the petitioner.

6. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS V) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

ms To 1.The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Building, Chennai - 600 003.

2.The Convenor, Committee rep.by its Convenor, Deputy Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Building, Chennai - 600 003.

+1cc to Mr.T.C.Gopalakrishnan, Advocate Sr.43093 +1cc to M/s Gnanadesikan Law Associates, Advocate Sr.43150 +1cc to Mr.P.S.Ganesh, Advocate Sr.43675 W.P.No.15476 of 2018 and W.M.P.No.18357 of 2018 srg 17/07/2018