Dhanalaxmi v. The Andaman And Nicobar Administration And ORS.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE [CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR] ...
WPA/126/2022 Dhanalaxmi ... Petitioner Vs.
The Andaman and Nicobar Administration and others ... Respondents Mr. KMB Jayapal ... for the petitioner Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty Mr. Ramendu Agarwal ... for the Administratin Mrs. Anjili Nag ... for the pvt.respondent November 17, 2022 [SR] Item No.15 Party/parties is/are represented in the order of their name/names as printed above in the cause title. Mr. KMB Jayapal, Learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, assails the Order dated 11th April, 2022 of the Director of Health Services/State Drugs Controller, Andaman and Nicobar Administration. It is submitted that the prayer of the petitioner for grant of commercial licence to run a pharmacy business in the premises in issue has been kept in abeyance only on the ground that a status quo has been directed to be maintained in respect of the premises in issue by a competent Civil Court.
Relying on an unreported decision of the Delhi High Court In Re: Sanjay Dewan vs. Licensing Authority and another, dated the 8th of July, 2019, it is further submitted
that merely because a status quo operates in respect of any premises/properties in issue, does not absolve the concerned State authority to take a decision in such matters such as a prayer for grant of a commercial license.
Both Ms. Anjili Nag, Learned Counsel appearing for the private respondent and Mr.Shatadru Chakraborty, Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents/the Director of Health Services, Andaman and Nicobar Administration, draws the attention of this Court to the pending T.S.No.41 of 2002 before the Hon'ble Civil Court (Senior Division), Port Blair.
It is submitted that the status quo has been directed to be maintained over the property in issue, including the part of the premises proposed to be utilized by the writ petitioner for her pharmacy business and, the said status quo extends to the nature, character and possession of the suit property.
It is further submitted that the State authorities are parties to the suit and hence are bound by the Order of the learned Civil Court.
Having heard the parties and considering the materials placed, this Court finds no ground for interfering with the Order impugned dated 11th April, 2022 in the light of the subsisting Order of status quo passed by the competent Civil Court.
In view of such fact, this Court finds that the judicial authority relied upon by the petitioner is distinguishable. This Court is also persuaded to hold that the Order of status quo covering the nature, character and possession of the suit property applies to the respondents/the Administration, including the Director of Health Services (supra), since such State authorities stand impleaded as defendants to the suit. WPA/126/2022 stands accordingly dismissed.
Since affidavits are not invited, all allegations to the contrary are deemed to be denied and disputed. All parties to act in terms of a copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. Urgent Xerox certified copy of this order be supplied to the Learned Counsel for the respective parties upon compliance of usual formalities.
( Subrata Talukdar, J. )