P.Tamilan, S/O.Palanisamy v. The District Collector,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.05.2017

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE M.V.MURALIDARAN and THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE W.P(MD)No.9041 of 2017 and W.M.P(MD)No.6908 of 2017 P.Tamilan ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

2. The District Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation, Dindigul District.

... Respondents Prayer:

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from commencing Tasmac Wine Shop at Kuttilnayakkanpatti Village, Ottanchathiram Taluk, Dindigul District, on the basis the petitioner's representation, dated 17.04.2017.

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Baskaran For first respondent : Mr.B.Pugalendhi, Additional Advocate General For 2nd respondent : Mr.M.Muniyasamy

O R D E R

(Order of the court was made by M.V.MURALIDARAN, J.) Mr.B.Pugalendhi, learned Additional Advocate General takes notice for the first respondent and Mr.M.Muniyasamy, learned counsel takes notice for the second respondent. 2.By consent of both parties, this Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.Though the prayer in the writ petition is for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from commencing

Tasmac Wine Shop at Kuttilnayakkanpatti Village, Ottanchathiram Taluk, Dindigul District, by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 17.04.2017, when the writ petition was taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is suffice, if a direction is issued to the 1st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 17.04.2017 and pass orders within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. 4.In view of the limited relief sought for, the 1st respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 17.04.2017 in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Tamil Nadu and others vs. K.Balu and another (Civil Appeal Nos.12164 to 12166 of 2016, dated 31.03.2017) followed by the First Bench of the Principal Seat of this Court in D.Ramesh vs.

The District Collector, Namakkal District, Namakkal and two others(W.P.No.9373 of 2017, decided on 18.04.2017) and also in accordance with the Tamil Nadu Liquor Retail Vending (Inshops and Bars) Rules, 2003 framed under the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the parties concerned, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(VO) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To

1. The District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

2. The District Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation, Dindigul District.

+1cc to Mr.V.Baskaran, Advocate Sr.No.56583 +1cc to The Spl. Government pleader Sr.No.56816 pm vb/mr/23.05.2017/2p/5c W.P(MD)No.9041 of 2017 17.05.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/