G. Rajendran and Others Vs. the Government of Tamil Nadu, State Rep. by Secretary, Department of Commercial Tasmac and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/934076
CourtChennai High Court
Decided OnSep-05-2012
Case NumberWrit Petition Nos. 24165, 24182 to 24185 of 2012 & M.P. No. 1 of 2012
JudgeM. JAICHANDREN
AppellantG. Rajendran and Others
RespondentThe Government of Tamil Nadu, State Rep. by Secretary, Department of Commercial Tasmac and Others
Advocates:For the Petitioners: M. Premkumar, Advocate. For the Respondents: R. Ravichandran, Additional Government Pleader.
Excerpt:
(prayer: petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india praying for a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the impugned temporarily suspension order proceeding no.pande2(1)/4297/2012 dated 16.8.2012 on the file of the 2nd respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent permitting the petitioner to run the business at tvl.hotel chaithanya inn, no.2/764, periyapalayam road, sai krupanagar, ponnery town, tiruvallur district.) 1. heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. at this stage of the hearing of this writ petition, it had been submitted, on behalf of the respondents, that the impugned order, suspending the licence issued in favour of the petitioner, may be set aside. however, the petitioner may be directed to participate in the enquiry to be conducted by the respondent concerned, pursuant to the notice issued to him, as per the procedures prescribed, under rule 22(1) of the tamil nadu liquor (licence and permit) rules, 1981. 3. it had been further submitted that the respondent concerned would consider the objections filed by the petitioner, if any, and pass appropriate orders thereon, based on the enquiry, on merits and in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 4. it had been further submitted that it would be open to the petitioner to run the bar in question, by following the procedures established by law and as per the license conditions. 5. in view of the above, the impugned order, suspending the licence issued in favour of the petitioner, is set aside. the petitioner is directed to participate in the enquiry to be conducted by the respondent concerned, pursuant to the notice issued to him. the enquiry shall be conducted, as per the procedures prescribed, under rule 22(1) of the tamil nadu liquor (licence and permit) rules, 1981. the respondent concerned shall conduct the enquiry and pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, not later than four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. the authorities concerned shall enable the petitioner to run the bar in question, by removing the seal, which have been put up by them, pursuant to the passing of the impugned order. the writ petition is ordered accordingly. no costs. consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Judgment:

(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the impugned temporarily suspension order proceeding No.PandE2(1)/4297/2012 dated 16.8.2012 on the file of the 2nd respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent permitting the petitioner to run the business at TVL.Hotel Chaithanya Inn, No.2/764, Periyapalayam Road, Sai Krupanagar, Ponnery Town, Tiruvallur District.)

1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. At this stage of the hearing of this writ petition, it had been submitted, on behalf of the respondents, that the impugned order, suspending the licence issued in favour of the petitioner, may be set aside. However, the petitioner may be directed to participate in the enquiry to be conducted by the respondent concerned, pursuant to the notice issued to him, as per the procedures prescribed, under Rule 22(1) of The Tamil Nadu Liquor (Licence and Permit) Rules, 1981.

3. It had been further submitted that the respondent concerned would consider the objections filed by the petitioner, if any, and pass appropriate orders thereon, based on the enquiry, on merits and in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

4. It had been further submitted that it would be open to the petitioner to run the bar in question, by following the procedures established by law and as per the license conditions.

5. In view of the above, the impugned order, suspending the licence issued in favour of the petitioner, is set aside. The petitioner is directed to participate in the enquiry to be conducted by the respondent concerned, pursuant to the notice issued to him. The enquiry shall be conducted, as per the procedures prescribed, under Rule 22(1) of The Tamil Nadu Liquor (Licence and Permit) Rules, 1981. The respondent concerned shall conduct the enquiry and pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, not later than four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The authorities concerned shall enable the petitioner to run the bar in question, by removing the seal, which have been put up by them, pursuant to the passing of the impugned order.

The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.