ORDER :

1. After a tiring day trekking in the forest, Lord Rama chose a resting place. He dropped his bow and arrows on the ground. When he woke up the next morning, he found that one of his arrows had fatally pierced a frog. The frog was about to breathe its last. The anguished Rama asked the frog as to why it did not raise an alarm. The innocent frog replied, “when others hurt me, I call your name “Rama Rama”-but when you are the source of trouble-who else can I call?” .

2. Any constitutional democracy (the prefix 'constitutional' is significant. An authoritarian political arrangement can claim to be people's democracy) rests on three pillars. When the individual liberty is threatened by legislative or executive action, one turns to judiciary for relief and remedy. In State of Madras v. V.G.Row (AIR 1952 SC 196), Justice M.Patanjali Sastri, C.J. remarked that the Supreme Court had been assigned the role of a sentinel on the qui vive as regards the fundamental rights. I venture to think that this applies with equal force to every court and not just the constitutional courts.

3. Why such reflections and prefatory remarks? The petitioner herein is running a Spa in the name and style of “Queen Ayurvedic Cross Spa Centre” at Trichy. Originally, there was no law regulating the said business and no license was required from any governmental authority. Since vide Gazette Notification No.252 dated 16.07.2018, obtaining of license has been made mandatory, the petitioner applied for such license. Since no action was taken on his request, he filed this writ petition for directing the police authority to issue “no objection certificate”. He also wanted this Court to restrain the police from interfering with the running of the Spa. The petitioner's counsel relied on an earlier order dated 12.08.2021 made in WP No.16811 of 2021. A learned Judge of this Court had directed the authorities concerned to issue “no objection certificate”, if the applicant satisfied all the requirements. In the event of granting such NOC, the respondents were restrained from interfering with the activities of the Spa so long as it is run in accordance with law. I was informed that a number of such orders have been passed. In line with the same, I disposed of the writ petition on 21.12.2021.

4. While so, the learned Government counsel made a mention that another learned Judge of this Court (His Lordship The Hon'ble Mr.Justice S.M.Subramaniam), while dealing with a similar writ petition, had issued the following directions vide order dated 20.12.2021 in WP No.37089 of 2015 (C.P.Girija vs. The Superintendent of Police, Villupuram District and two others) :

“1)The respondents are directed to issue appropriate orders to all the Spa and Massage centers, Therapy centers etc., across the State of Tamil Nadu to install CCTV cameras which must be functional in all circumstances.

2) Appropriate directions are to be issued to ensure that these Spa, Massage centers, Therapy centers etc., are conducting their business activities in a transparent manner and avoid secluded or closed rooms paving way for illegal activities.

3) In the event of any reasonable suspicion, information or complaint, the Police authorities are directed to initiate all appropriate actions in the manner known to law.”

The learned Government counsel felt that it was his bounden duty to bring it to my notice about the passing of such an order a day prior to the disposal of the present writ petition.

5.I wondered if I should recall the order earlier passed and refer the matter to My Lord the Hon'ble Chief Justice. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.Kasi vs. State (AIR 2020 SC 2921) had held that a coordinate Bench cannot take a contrary view and that it can only refer the matter for consideration by a Larger Bench. But where the law has already been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in view of Article 141 of the Constitution of India, one is obliged to follow the same.

6. In my humblest opinion, and I say this wit