SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(Mad) 3207

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
M. JAICHANDREN & M. VENUGOPAL, JJ.

S. Denisraj
Versus
The District Collector, Trichy & Another
Writ Petition (MD) No. 13228 of 2013 & M.P. (MD) Nos. 1 & 2 of 2013
Decided On : 11-09-2013

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:V. Nagendran, Advocate.
For the Respondents:R1, K. Baskara Pandian, Special Government Pleader, R2, Muniasamy, Advocate.

Compliance with the Tamil Nadu Liquor Retail Vending Rules, 2003 and the absence of nuisance to local residents were crucial in determining the outcome of the case.

Headnote:

Prohibition - TASMAC Shop Location - The court dismissed the writ petition seeking to prohibit the shifting of a TASMAC shop to a new location, as it was found that the shop was not located within the prohibited area under the Tamil Nadu Liquor Retail Vending Rules, 2003.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought a writ of prohibition to prevent the shifting of a TASMAC shop to a new location, citing the proximity of the shop to various public facilities and the alleged violation of liquor retail vending rules.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the TASMAC shop was not located within the prohibited area as per the Tamil Nadu Liquor Retail Vending Rules, 2003, and that there was no evidence of it causing nuisance to the local residents.

Issues: Proximity of TASMAC shop to public facilities, alleged violation of liquor retail vending rules, and the impact on local residents.

Ratio Decidendi: The decision was based on the findings of the Advocate Commissioner's report, which established that the TASMAC shop was not located within the prohibited area and was not causing nuisance to the local residents.

Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed as it was found to be devoid of merits, and no costs were imposed.

Judgment :

M. Jaichandren, J.

1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the first respondent, as well as the learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the second respondent.

2. Mr.V.Nagendran, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, had submitted that this Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of prohibition, prohibiting the respondents from the shifting the TASMAC shop, bearing No.10337, to Kallamettu Street, Kallakudi, Lalgudi Taluk, Trichy District or to restrain the respondent from establishing a new liquor outlet at No.8, Chidambaram Road, Kallakudi, Lalkudi Taluk, Trichirapalli District.

3. The main contention of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that there is a pipe line supplying drinking water to the public at large close to the TASMAC shop, bearing No.10337. The learned counsel had also stated that there is a girls hostel by the name "Holly Cross Girls Hostel", within 30 meters from the shop and a temple by the name Arulmigu Karuppannasamy temple is situated within 70 meters from the said shop. It is also stated that a community hall is located within 60 meters from the shop and a nursery school is also functioning within the prohibited distance.

4. In view of the said submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Court had appointed an Advocate Commissioner to inspect the area in question and to measure the distance of the various places mentioned in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and to prepare a map showing the liquor shop in question. Accordingly, the Advocate Commissioner had filed a report, before this Court, dated 03.09.2013. From the report of the Advocate Commissioner, dated 03.09.2013, it could be seen that the Karuppusamy Temple is situated at a distance of 148.5 meters and Punitha Siluvai Kanniyar Illam is situated at a distance of 129.3 meters from the TASMAC shop. It could also be seen that Saveriyar Samuthaya Koodam (Saveriyar Society Hall), which is a private building is situated at a distance of 155 meters from the TASMAC shop in question. It has also been noted that Beulah Nursery and Primary School is located at a distance of 257 meters from the shop in question. Thus, it could be seen that that the TASMAC shop in question is not located within the area prohibited under the Tamil Nadu Liquor Retail Vending (in shops and Bars) Rules, 2003.

5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has not been in a position to show that the TASMAC shop, located at No.8, Chidambaram Road, Kallakudi, Lalkudi Taluk, Tiruchirappalli District, has been established contrary to the Tamil Nadu Liquor Retail Vending (in shops and Bars) Rules, 2003 and that it is causing nuisance to the persons residing in the locality in question. Hence, we do not find any merit in the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner. In such view of the matter, we find it appropriate to dismiss the writ petition as it is devoid of merits.

6. Hence, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected M.Ps. are also dismissed.



Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top