1. By consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for disposal.

2. Whether prohibition of running a restaurant, permitting using tobacco products, such as "Hookah" in the residential locality, is justified and in accordance with law ? is the important question, to be decided in this Writ Petition.

3. The petitioner-restaurant has sought to forbear the respondents from in any way interfering with the business at Robustaa Restaurant at No.24/67, Halls Road, Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010, pursuant to the licence granted by the first respondent in Licence Code No.K070071590/2010-2011, dated 23.3.2011.

4. According to the petitioner, the restaurant was started in January 2011. The petitioner applied for licence before the first respondent and it was granted to the petitioner in Licence Code No. K070071590 in its order dated 8.2.2011 and the licence was valid upto 31.3.2011 and the petitioner also paid the necessary licence fee of Rs.12,650/- to start the restaurant, namely for vegetarian food like Italian with Indian Fillings (Pizza, Pastam etc.), Indian Starters and Rices, Coolers , Coffees, Shakes and Deserts, Sandwiches and more Indian dishes.

5. Basically, the restaurant is a small eat-out-joint in Kilpauk area catering to the needs of the middle class people. The terms and conditions of the licence have been set out in the licence granted under Section 279 of the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the CCMC Act'). The said licence was renewed by the order of the first respondent on 23.3.2011 for a further period of one year after the payment of the required licence fee and it is valid upto 31.3.2012 and till date, this licence has not been cancelled by the first respondent. In addition to the above licence, the petitioner has obtained fire service licence and has been maintaining the restaurant as prescribed by the first respondent, by following the rules and regulations and kept the restaurant tidy and clean.

6. While so, the second respondent issued a notice under Section 379-A of the CCMC Act, intimating the following defects, which are to be rectified:

(a) Chimney (smoke outlet) should be raised to six feet from the surrounding structure.

(b) The use of tobacco products inside the restaurant should be stopped immediately.

(c) Using tobacco with smoking should be prevented immediately, otherwise causing public health nuisances.

(d) Food handlers should be medically examined by payment of necessary fee.

(e) Burning of any kind of cooking articles outside the premises should be prevented.

(f) To obtain neighbours' NOC and produce.

(g) Sound nuisance from the eating house causing public health nuisance be stopped.

7. For the above notice, the petitioner-restaurant gave a reply to the second respondent on 2.5.2011 complying with all the defects as mentioned in the said notice, dated 25.4.2011. The petitioner also intimated that the chimney is raised to six feet above the neighbouring buildings, as requested by the second respondent and tobacco products were not in use inside the restaurant and separate zone has been earmarked for tobacco users. It was also mentioned that smoking of tobacco was prohibited inside the restaurant except in a particular zone and in the said reply-letter, it was further mentioned that necessary fee has been paid for medical examination of the food handlers and no burning of any kind of cooking articles outside the premises is taking place. NOC has been obtained from the adjacent owners of the building and there was no sound nuisance from the eating house and causing public health nuisance at any point of time.

8. In such a situation, one Rukshan Annexe Association (impleaded third respondent in this Writ Petition), which is a residential complex situated behind the petitioner-restaurant, in its letter addressed to the first and second respondents on 14.4.2011, stated that the petitioner is causing health hazards a