← Library
Madras High CourtWP/37645/2016dismissed

M/S.Beauty Plus Family Saloon v. The Commissioner Of Police

2016-11-15Honourable Mr Justice B. Rajendran2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15.11.2016

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN W. P. No.37645 of 2016 M/s.Beauty Plus Family Saloon, rep. by its Proprietor A.Madeena 9, Gowri Chithra Garden, Vadapalani, Chennai - 600 026.

..

Petitioner - Vs -

1. The Commissioner of Police, Vepery, Chennai.

2. The Inspector of Police, R-5, Virugambakkam Police Station, Chennai.

..

Respondents Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents or their men, agents from interfering with any manner with the normal functioning of the trade carried on by the petitioner under the name and style of "Beauty Plus Family Saloon, 9, Gowri Chithra Garden, Vadapalani, Chennai - 600 026..

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sudhakar For Respondents : Mr.R.S.Selvam Government Advocate

O R D E R

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Advocte appearing on behalf of the respondents and with the consent on either side, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

2.

The petitioner's case is that she is carrying on business in the name and style of "Beauty Plus Family Saloon, at 9, Gowri Chithra Garden, Vadapalani, Chennai - 600 026 and the petitioner is running the centre following the principle of herbal and ayurvedic medicines which includes massage and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

minimum of body exercise. There is no law regulating these kind of business under any of the provisions of the City Police Act. While so, the respondent officials are interfering with the business of the petitioner and they are threatening the petitioner to close the business of the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner has come forward with the present Writ Petition.

3. The learned Special Government Pleader has filed a report on behalf of the second respondent stating that the petitioner has not obtained any valid license for running the said centre.

4. In such view of the matter, the prayer as sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted. Hence, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.

5. It is seen that the advocates are filing Writ Petitions as batch matters without verifying whether the petitioners are having valid license. Such practice should be avoided, failing which serious action will be taken if such Writ Petitions are filed. The Advocate concerned is warned.

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

1. The Commissioner of Police, Vepery, Chennai.

2. The Inspector of Police, R-5, Virugambakkam Police Station, Chennai.

+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.66126 svi(CO) md(21/12/2016) W.P.No.37645 of 2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/