P.Ayyasamy v. The Commissioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 30.09.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN Writ Petition No.27363 of 2019 P.Ayyasamy ... Petitioner /versus/ 1.The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, Ripon Building, Chennai 600 003.

2.The Director, Tamil Nadu Food Safety and Drug Administration Department, (Food Safety Wing), O/othe Designated Officer Chennai District, No.33, West Jones Road, Saidapet, Chennai 600 015.

3.The District Collector, Kanchipuram District, At Kanchipuram.

4.The Zonal Officer, Zone-XIV, Ward No.184, Chennai Corporation, Puzhuthivakkam, Chennai.

5.The Divisional Engineer, TANGEDCO, Tharamani, 6.The Inspector of Police, J9 Thoraipakkam Police Station, 7.Thiru.R.Ganesan

8.Hotel A1 Ajwa, Rep.by its Proprietor, Thiru.A.A.Jaffer Ali, S/o P.A.A.Abbas Ali, No.10/6, 2nd Cross Street, Santhiyappan Road, Kanthanchavadi, Chennai 600 096.

.. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 4 to consider the petitioner representation dated 16.08.2019 and thereby direct the respondents 1 to 4 to take action against the 8th respondent for running the hotel at No.10/6, 2nd Cross Street, Santhiyappan Road, Kanthanchavadi, Chennai 600 096 without any valid license and any infrastructure by causing nuisance, noise and traffic jam.

For Petitioner :Mr.R.Suryaprakash For Respondents : Mrs.Karthika Ashok, st.c for R1 Mr.N.Inbanathan, AGP for R2,3,4,5,6 Mr.V.Manisekaran, for R8 R7- NA

O R D E R

The prayer in the writ petition is to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing respondents 1 to 4 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 16.08.2019 and thereby direct respondents 1 to 4 to take action against the 8th respondent for running the hotel at No.10/6, 2nd Cross Street, Santhiyappan Road, Kanthanchavadi, Chennai 600 096 without any valid license and any infrastructure by causing nuisance, noise and traffic jam.

2.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents 2 to 6 would submit that the Food Safety Officer has inspected the disputed premises and has sealed the eatery on 20.09.2019.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the 7th respondent/landlord of the premises states that the premises was sealed by the authorities. His tenant, who is the 8th respondent has taken away all his belongings and vacated the premises. 4.In the light of the above fact, nothing survives in the writ petition. Hence, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

However, the 8th respondent, who is present today does not admit that he vacated the premises. In any event, the photograph produced by the learned Additional Government Pleader indicates that the premises has been sealed by the Food Safety Authorities by violation of the Food Safety Act. If the 8th respondent has any grievance in the said action taken by the Food Safety Authority, it is always open to him to agitate before the appropriate Forum. No costs.

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

1.The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, Ripon Building, Chennai 600 003.

2.The Director, Tamil Nadu Food Safety and Drug Administration Department, (Food Safety Wing), O/othe Designated Officer Chennai District, No.33, West Jones Road, Saidapet, Chennai 600 015.

3.The District Collector, Kanchipuram District, At Kanchipuram.

4.The Zonal Officer, Zone-XIV, Ward No.184, Chennai Corporation, Puzhuthivakkam, Chennai.

5.The Divisional Engineer, TANGEDCO, Tharamani,

6.The Inspector of Police, J9 Thoraipakkam Police Station, +1cc to the Government Pleader Sr.84015 +1cc to M/s.Karthikaa Ashok, Advocate Sr.83559 +1cc to Mr.R.Surya Prakash, Advocate Sr.83524 W.P.No.27363 of 2019 SVI[co] srg 08/11/2019