Thangaraj Vs. The Director, Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable TV Corporation Limited, Chennai and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1190757
CourtChennai Madurai High Court
Decided OnJun-06-2016
Case NumberWrit Petition (MD).No. 9903 of 2016
JudgeM. Venugopal
AppellantThangaraj
RespondentThe Director, Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable TV Corporation Limited, Chennai and Others
Excerpt:
(prayer: writ petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the 3rd and 4th respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 28.4.2016.) 1. to avoid an avoidable delay, since no adverse orders are passed against the fifth respondent, notice to the fifth respondent is dispensed with. 2. according to the petitioner, he is running arasu cable tv network in b mettur village panchayat limits and he is a licensed holder and the same is in currency. the fifth respondent although a licensed holder, his license pertains only to alathudaiyampatti village limit. 3. the grievance of the petitioner is that the fifth respondent, on the basis of the license obtained in his favour with respect to alathudaiyampatti village, thuraiyur taluk has now chosen to extend the service to b mettur village, thuraiyur and thereby invades into the petitioner's business. furthermore, the fifth respondent is extending the service to the people and residents of b mettur and thereby cutting into the business of the petitioner and in turn violated the provisions of cable tv network regulation act. 4. as a matter of fact, the petitioner had submitted a representation to the respondents on 28.04.2016 calling upon them to disconnect all the unlawful services that are being provided by the fifth respondent in lco46346 standing in favour of the fifth respondent. since the respondents have not taken any steps on the representation of the petitioner dated 28.04.2016, the petitioner is constrained to file the present writ petition before this court. 5. in view of the fact that the petitioner's representation dated 28.04.2016 addressed to the respondents 3 and 4 is pending as on date, this court, in the interest of justice and fair play, directs the third respondent/special tahsildar (cable tv), trichirappalli, to look into the representation of the petitioner dated 28.04.2016 with all seriousness and earnestness and to pass a reasoned, speaking order on merits with an open, unbiased mind and also in dispassionate manner (by outlining the process of reasoning in a qualitative and quantitative fashion) within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (of-course after providing necessary opportunity to the petitioner, fifth respondent and others concerned, if any by following the principles of natural justice in true letter and spirit). 6. with the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. no costs.
Judgment:

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the 3rd and 4th respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 28.4.2016.)

1. To avoid an avoidable delay, since no adverse orders are passed against the fifth respondent, notice to the fifth respondent is dispensed with.

2. According to the petitioner, he is running Arasu Cable TV Network in B Mettur Village Panchayat Limits and he is a licensed holder and the same is in currency. The fifth respondent although a licensed holder, his license pertains only to Alathudaiyampatti Village limit.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the fifth respondent, on the basis of the license obtained in his favour with respect to Alathudaiyampatti Village, Thuraiyur Taluk has now chosen to extend the service to B Mettur Village, Thuraiyur and thereby invades into the petitioner's business. Furthermore, the fifth respondent is extending the service to the people and residents of B Mettur and thereby cutting into the business of the petitioner and in turn violated the provisions of Cable TV Network Regulation Act.

4. As a matter of fact, the petitioner had submitted a representation to the respondents on 28.04.2016 calling upon them to disconnect all the unlawful services that are being provided by the fifth respondent in LCO46346 standing in favour of the fifth respondent. Since the respondents have not taken any steps on the representation of the petitioner dated 28.04.2016, the petitioner is constrained to file the present writ petition before this Court.

5. In view of the fact that the petitioner's representation dated 28.04.2016 addressed to the respondents 3 and 4 is pending as on date, this Court, in the interest of Justice and Fair Play, directs the third respondent/Special Tahsildar (Cable TV), Trichirappalli, to look into the representation of the petitioner dated 28.04.2016 with all seriousness and earnestness and to pass a reasoned, speaking order on merits with an open, unbiased mind and also in dispassionate manner (by outlining the process of reasoning in a qualitative and quantitative fashion) within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (of-course after providing necessary opportunity to the petitioner, fifth respondent and others concerned, if any by following the principles of Natural Justice in true letter and spirit).

6. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.