S.Senthil Kumar Vs The Commissioner

S.Senthil Kumar vs The Commissioner

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided Jun 01, 2026

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1667136

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1667136
Court: Chennai Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr Justice G.R.Swaminathan,Honourable Ms.Justice R. Poornima
Decided On: Jun 01, 2026
Case Number: WP(MD)/26049/2019

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

S.Senthil Kumar

Respondent

The Commissioner

Excerpt

before the madurai bench of madras high court dated : 01.06.2026coramthe honourable mr.justice g.r.swaminathan and the honourable ms.justice r.poornima and w.m.p(md)nos.22537 & 22538 of 2019 s.senthil kumar ... petitioner vs. madurai - 625 002. ... respondents prayer: writ petition filed under article 226 of constitution of india, to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the entire records pertaining to the impugned order of the second respondent made in mava2/masa1/010504/19, dated 26.08.2019 and quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to permit the petitioner to run his tea stall situated at no.279, 80 feet road, near shenbaga thottam, anna nagar, madurai. for petitioner : mr.i.mohamed razvi for respondents : mr.k.k.kannan for r.1 mr.j.gunaseelan muthiah for r.2order(order of the court was made by g.r.swaminathan j.) heard both sides. 2.vide notice dated 26.08.2019, the second respondent called upon the petitioner to vacate the petition mentioned premises. the petitioner is running a shop on the roadside margin. the hon'ble division bench of this court had given a direction to the corporation that on such roadside margin, shops should not be allowed to run. the petitioner is also not having any license in his favor. we do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned notice. 3.this writ petition stands dismissed. no costs. consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. [g.r.s., j.] [r.p, j.] ncc : yes / no index : yes / no internet : yes/ no mga tog.r.swaminathan, j.andr.poornima, j.mga

Full Judgment

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 01.06.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN AND THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA and W.M.P(MD)Nos.22537 & 22538 of 2019 S.Senthil Kumar ... Petitioner Vs. Madurai - 625 002. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the entire records pertaining to the impugned order of the second respondent made in MAVA2/MASA1/010504/19, dated 26.08.2019 and quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to permit the petitioner to run his Tea Stall situated at No.279, 80 feet Road, near Shenbaga Thottam, Anna Nagar, Madurai. For Petitioner : Mr.I.Mohamed Razvi For Respondents : Mr.K.K.Kannan for R.1 Mr.J.Gunaseelan Muthiah for R.2

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by G.R.Swaminathan J.) Heard both sides. 2.Vide notice dated 26.08.2019, the second respondent called upon the petitioner to vacate the petition mentioned premises. The petitioner is running a shop on the roadside margin. The Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court had given a direction to the Corporation that on such roadside margin, shops should not be allowed to run. The petitioner is also not having any license in his favor. We do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned notice. 3.This Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. [G.R.S., J.] [R.P, J.] NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No MGA To

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

AND

R.POORNIMA, J.

MGA

Same Court & Year Chennai Orders · 2026 Same Parties S.Senthil Kumar vs The Commissioner Same Judge Honourable Mr Justice G.R.Swaminathan,Honourable Ms.Justice R...