Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ, G.ARUL MURUGAN, J
M.Palani – Appellant
Versus
The Collector Cuddalore District, Cuddalore – Respondent
WP No.41895 of 2025 | WMP No.46936 of 2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court emphasizes restrictions on commercial activity in residential areas. (Para 1) |
| 2. dismissal of the writ petition due to lack of challenge against prior judgments. (Para 2) |
Challenge to notice dated 28.8.2025 on the ground that it is permissible under law for the petitioner to continue with the present commercial activity of running a Wood Works shop is liable to be rejected at the threshold, because the petitioner was party to W.P.No.9626 of 2024, wherein a Division Bench of this Court has held that no industry can be permitted in residential area and directed the authorities to ensure that commercial activity is suspended.
2. The notice impugned in this writ petition has been issued pursuant to the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.9626 of 2024. The petitioner has not chosen to challenge the said order. That apart, the petitioner has not placed any shred of material in support of his plea that commercial activity is permitted in residential area.
The petition is, therefore, misconceived and not maintainable. The writ petition is,accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, interim application stands closed.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
