Balaseenivasan v. The Managing Director
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 03.10.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ and W.M.P.(MD).No.20014 of 2024 Balaseenivasan ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited (TASMAC), Gandhi Ervin Bridge Road, Egmore, Chennai - 08.
2.The Regional Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited (TASMAC), Madurai Region, Plot No.100, Anna Nagar, Sathamangalam, Madurai - 20.
3.The District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.
4.The District Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited (TASMAC), Office at Dindigul to Trichy National Highways, Mullipadi Post, Dindigul District - 624 005.
1/5
5.Jeyapal 6.Vellaisamy
...Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the 1 to 4 respondents from relocating or shifting the TASMAC Shop No.3382 from R.Vellodu Village, Vedasandur to Karur Road, Gujiliyamparai Taluk, Dindigul District till the expiry of license period of the petitioner i.e., 31.12.2025. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Navaneetharaja For R-1, R-2 & R-4 : Mr.H.Arumugam Standing Counsel For R-3 : Mr.R.Sureshkumar Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
The present Writ Petition is filed for Mandamus forbearing the respondents 1 to 4 from relocating/shifting the TASMAC Shop No.3382 till the expiry of license period of the petitioner, i.e., 31.12.2025.
2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the fourth respondent issued a notification dated 12.01.2024, inviting bids for running a bar attached with TASMAC Shop No.3382. Pursuant to the said notification, the petitioner participated in the tender process, which took place on 07.02.2024 and he was the successful bidder. A letter of acceptance dated 2/5
08.02.2024 was issued by the fourth respondent and the petitioner was issued with a license to run a bar attached to the TASMAC Shop No.3382 for the period from 13.02.2024 to 31.12.2025. The petitioner has obtained all the necessary approval/sanction including FSSAI certificate. It is submitted that the fourth respondent is now proposing to shift the TASMAC shop to a location, which is less than 400 meters away from the present shop. It is submitted that the above proposal is clearly unjustified and lacks bonafide.
3. It is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 1, 2 and 4 that the present Writ Petition is premature as the respondents/authorities, due to administrative reasons, are considering the need to shift/relocate the shop. The same is under consideration and no contrary decision has yet been taken.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in terms of Clause (2) of the license, even if the TASMAC shop has to be relocated, the petitioner would have certain rights in terms thereof, that would have to be complied with by the appropriate authority.
5. I do not propose to express anything on the merits of the above submission, which is on the basis of an apprehension lurking in the mind of the 3/5
petitioner. If the above clause confers certain condition/benefit/right to the petitioner or an obligation is cast on the respondent/authority, it is certainly necessary that said conditions are complied with.
6. This Court finds merit in the submission of the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents that the present Writ Petition is premature inasmuch as no decision has been taken for relocation of the shop. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. Relocation of the shop, if any, shall be made in due compliance with the procedure/conditions relating thereto. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition stands closed.
03.10.2024 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No Lm To The District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.
4/5
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ , J.
Lm 03.10.2024 5/5