M/S. Ryan Spa Unisex Saloon v. The Commissioner Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 15.11.2016
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN W. P. No.37646 of 2016 M/s.Ryan Spa Unisex Saloon in the Name & Style of Melia Spa Rep. by its Proprietor K.Muthukumaran Door No.51, E.V.R. Road, (Poonamallee High Road), Periamet, Chennai - 600 003.
..
Petitioner - Vs -
1. The Commissioner of Police, Vepery, Chennai.
2. The Inspector of Police, G.2 Periamet 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 from interfering in any manner with the normal functioning of the trade carried on by the petitioner under the name and style of M/s.Ryan Spa Unisex Saloon, in the Name & Style of Melia Spa at Door No.51, E.V.R. Road, (Poonamallee High Road), Periamet, Chennai - 600 003. 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 Government Advocate 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 he is carrying on beauty parlour as Ryan Spa Unisex Saloon, in the Name & Style of Melia Spa Door No.51, E.V.R. Road, (Poonamallee High Road), Periamet, Chennai - 600 003, for the past five months and in his parlour, he is following the herbal and ayurvedic medicines and massage and minimum body exercises. There is no law regulating this kind of business and the petitioner has obtained valid license for running the business.
3. It is the further case of the petitioner that there are qualified and trained therapist available and without any rhyme or reason, the 2nd respondent police has interfered with his business activities under the guise of conducting raid. In this regard, the petitioner sent a representation dated 15.10.2016 and in spite of receipt of the same, interference continues and hence, the petitioner has come forward with this writ petition.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner on instructions would submit that no illegal or unlawful activities take place while conducting business activities and therefore, the 6th respondent cannot interfere with the business activities. The learned counsel for the petitioner also drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated 28.04.2015 made in WP.12817/2015, wherein, this Court has taken into consideration the common order dated 09.12.2014 made in WP.Nos.24629/2014 etc., batch [Masti Health and Beauty Private Limited Vs. Commissioner of Police, Chennai] reported in 2015 [1] MLJ 308 and prays for similar orders.
5. The learned Special Government Pleader, on instructions, would submit that there are no previous cases as against the petitioner's Salon and Spa.
6. It is relevant to extract paragraph 67 of the order in Masti's case [cited supta], which reads as follows:- "67.In the light of the above, all the writ petitions are disposed of to the following effect:- [i] The respondents shall not, as a matter of routine and without any basis, conduct any raids and interfere with the business carried on by the petitioners ;
[ii] In specific cases, where the police have reasonable grounds to believe that an offence punishable under the Immoral Traffic [Prevention] Act, has been or is being committed, it is open to the police to take action, after scrupulously following all the steps indicated in Section 15 of the said Act. The steps to be followed are narrated by me in paragraph 28 above ; and [iii] Based upon the laws enacted in various States of the United States of America and Singapore, which I have dealt with in paragraphs 39 to 54, the respondents may take appropriate steps for bringing in either a new legislation or a subordinate legislation in terms of the provisions of the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act or the Chennai City Police Act, so that public order, decency and morality, which can form the basis for a regulatory law under Article 19[2] of the Constitution, are taken care of. The Government shall file a report on or before 31.03.2015, before this Court, about the decision taken. No costs.
Consequently, all connected pending MPs are closed."
7.
In the light of the said order, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to comply with the directions/conditions imposed in paragraph 67 of the said order as extracted above. It is also made clear that the petitioner under the guise of carrying on business activity, shall not indulge in any unlawful or illegal activities detrimental to law and order or public order. It is further made clear that this order will not prohibit the respondents / authorities concerned from interfering in the petitioner's business activities, if there is any violation on the part of the petitioner. No costs.
8. 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, G.2 Periamet Police Station, Chennai.
+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.66127 svi(CO) md(21/12/2016) W.P.No.37646 of 2016