Madras High CourtWP(MD)/1716/2014disposed of

P. Esawari, v. The Managing Director

2016-11-07Honourable Mr Justice V. Bharathidasan2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.11.2016

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN Writ Petition (MD) No.1716 of 2014 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2014 P. Eswari, ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu ARASU Cable T.V. Corporation, No.11/22, Mangadu Samy Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai.

2. The Tahsildar, Tamil Nadu ARASU Cable T.V. Corporation, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

3. Saravanan, ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Writ directing the respondents 1 & 2 to issue license (LCO- Local Cable Operator) to the petitioner to operate the Tamil Nadu ARASU Cable T.V. at Kattikulam Village, Manamadurai Taluk, Sivagangai District and pass such further or other order. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Kannan For Respondents : Mr.Abdul Saleem for Mr.S.Satheesh Kumar for R-1 & 2 No appearance for R-3

ORDER

The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking a direction, directing the respondents 1 & 2 to issue license (LCOLocal Cable Operator) to the petitioner to operate the Tamil Nadu ARASU Cable T.V. at Kattikulam Village, Manamadurai Taluk, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Sivagangai District within the time frame fixed by this court. 2.According to the petitioner, he is a LCO (Local Cable TV Operator) in Manamadurai Taluk, Sivagangai District, under the Arasu Cable TV Corporation. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has given representations to the respondent dated 15.10.2013 and 12.12.2013, with regard to fixing of monthly subscription payment based on the number of subscribers. Sofar, the said representations has not been considered by the 1 & 2 respondents. Hence, he has filed the present writ petition. 3.Mr.Abdul Saleem, learned counsel appearing for the 1 & 2 respondents/Arasu Cable TV Corporation submitted that they are ready and willing to consider the petitioner's representation within a time limit prescribed by this Court. 4.

In view of the above submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the 1 and 2 respondents, the respondents are directed to consider the petitioner's representations dated 15.10.2013 and 12.12.2013, after giving opportunity to the petitioner as well as any rival claimant, if any, and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5.With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AE) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar vs JAM/07.12.16/SK-SKN/2p-1c W.P(MD)No.1716 of 2014 07.11.2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/