R.C.Elangovan v. The District Collector,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23.10.2025 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI and W.M.P.No.44270 of 2025 R.C.Elangovan ... Petitioner Vs 1.The District Collector, Office of The District Collector, Ariyalur District, Ariyalur-621 704.
2.The District Revenue Officer Cum Additional District Magistrate Ariyalur District, Ariyalur-621 704.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Cum Divisional Magistrate, Ariyalur Division, Ariyalur District-621 704.
... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records from the file of the 2nd Respondents in vide Na.Ka.C2/7635/2023 dated 14.10.2025 and quash the same and direct the respondents to renewed the said license dated 02.11.2018 in proceedings Vide Rc.No.7993/C2/18 in license No.02/2018-2019 (Permanent) for the present year.
1/6
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Vignesh For Respondents : Mrs.S.Anitha, Special Government Pleader O R D E R Aggrieved by the order of rejection dated 14.10.2025 passed by the 3rd respondent for renewal of the petitioner's license for selling crackers, the petitioner is before this Court praying for a direction to the respondents to renew the said license.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that his application for renewal of license for selling crackers was rejected by the 3rd respondent vide order dated 14.10.2025 on the ground of certain violations of Standard Operating Procedure. Aggrieved by which, the petitioner has come up with the present Writ Petition seeking the aforesaid relief.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had submitted his undertaking affidavit stating that the petitioner will strictly adhered to the Standard Operating Procedure, however, without considering the same, the present impugned order has come to be passed which is wholly arbitrary and illegal. He further submitted that, if the petitioner's application for renewal of license is not considered favourably, he will be greatly prejudiced as he has invested huge sums of money for running the crackers shop and therefore, the order impugned in this Writ Petition requires interference at the hands of this Court.
2/6
4. Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3 while defending the impugned order submitted that the petitioner is running the crackers shop without following the Standard Operating Procedure which was ground for temporary cancellation of the license which was granted and therefore, no interference is warranted with the order impugned in this Writ Petition.
5. This Court heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.
6. It is seen from the records that, as against the temporary suspension of license for running the crackers shop, interim order was granted by this court so as to enable the petitioner to run the crackers shop during the festival period so that the petitioner may not suffer however, that alone cannot confer any right on the petitioner to run the crackers shop.
7. It is the specific case of the respondents that the crackers shop is situated in close proximity with other such shops which is not permissible. The petitioner was directed to comply with certain guidelines which alone can form the basis for grant of license. Since, the license already granted was expired, the interim order granted by this Court cannot be continued and the petitioner has to seek for a fresh license as the petitioner cannot run the shop beyond the date of expiry. 3/6
8. In such view of the matter, necessarily, the petitioner has to comply with the Standard Operation Procedure which alone will enable the respondents to consider the request for grant of permanent license for the petitioner. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the respondents, however, it would suffice to grant liberty to the petitioner to comply with the Standard Operating Procedure prescribed by the respondents.
9. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to submit a fresh application for grant of permanent license before the respondents within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If any such application is filed, the respondents are directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on the same in accordance with law within a period of four (4) weeks thereafter, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and any other interested parties.
10. This Writ Petition is disposed of in the above terms. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
23.10.2025 Index : Yes / No Speaking Order / Non-speaking order Nhs 4/6
To 1.The District Collector, Office of The District Collector, Ariyalur District, Ariyalur-621 704.
2.The District Revenue Officer Cum Additional District Magistrate Ariyalur District, Ariyalur-621 704.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Cum Divisional Magistrate, Ariyalur Division, Ariyalur District-621 704.
5/6
M.DHANDAPANI, J Nhs and W.M.P.No.44270 of 2025 23.10.2025 6/6