← Library
Madras High CourtWP/29893/2018dismissed as infructuous

S.Ravi @ Ravindran v. The Commissioner

2021-04-21Honourable Mr Justice D. Krishnakumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 21.4.2021 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR W.P.No.29893 of 2018 S.Ravi @ Ravindran Old No.26 New 67, East Vanniyar Street West K.K.Nagar, Chennai - 600 078.

...Petitioner

Vs.

1 The Commissioner Greater Chennai Corporation, Chennai - 600 003 2 The Zonal Officer, Zone 10 Greater Corporation of Chennai, No. 64, N.S.K.Salai, Kodambakkam, Chennai - 600 024.

3. P.Mohan Proprietor S.P.M.Fabricated Company, Old No. 26/1 New No.65 East Vanniyar Street, West K.K.Nagar Chennai - 600 078

...Respondents

Prayer :

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 herein to consider and dispose the petitioners representation dated 18.09.2018 for removing the 4th respondent company viz. SPM Fabricator from the premises bearing Old No.26/1 New No.65 East Vanniar Street West K.K.Nagar Chennai - 600 079.

For Petitioner : No appearance For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mrs.Karthikaa Ashok For Respondent No.3 : Mr.K.Yuvaraj

O R D E R

The grievance of the petitioner is that the third respondent running a workshop nearby the petitioner's residence, emitting black smoke causing pollution and also noise pollution https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

in the area. The petitioner sent representation to the first respondent and the same does not evoke any response. Therefore, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking direction to the respondent Corporation.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation would submit that enquiry was conducted and the enquiry reveals that the 4th respondent vacated the premises and trade was closed by the Corporation on 5.10.2019. The allegations made in the counter affidavit filed by the fourth respondent cannot be considered in the present writ petition. The fourth respondent has to work out remedy in the manner known to law.

3. Recording the statement made by the counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS II) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar vaan To 1 The Commissioner Greater Chennai Corporation, Chennai - 600 003 2 The Zonal Officer, Zone 10 Greater Corporation of Chennai, No. 64, N.S.K.Salai, Kodambakkam, Chennai - 600 024.

+1cc to M/s.Karthikaa Ashok, Advocate, S.R.No.24747 W.P.No.29893 of 2018 VBM[co] NSK 08/09/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/