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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 4737

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable The CHIEF JUSTICE
N.SIVAKUMAR – Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner of prohibition and Excise – Respondent



##PAGE1##

W.P.No.2414 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30.01.2026

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,

CHIEF JUSTICE

AND

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN

W.P.No.2414 of 2026

&

W.M.P.No.2652 of 2026

N.Sivakumar

S./o Natrajan

2/14 B, Muthampalayam

Chengapalli Post

Tiruppur District 638 812

Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise

Ezhilagam

Chennai 600 005.

2. The District Collector

Tiruppur District

Tiruppur.

3. The Managing Director

Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd (TASMAC)

4th Floor, CMDA Tower, Egmore

Chennai.

__________

Page 1 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/02/2026 05:51:16 pm )

##PAGE2##

W.P.No.2414 of 2026

4. The Superintendent of Police

Tiruppur District

Tiruppur.

5. The Senior Regional Manager

Tamil Nadu Marketing Corporation Ltd (TASMAC)

305A, Vilankurichi Road

Peelammedu

Coimbatore.

6. The District Manager

Tamil Nadu Marketing Corporation Ltd (TASMAC)

Angeripalayam Road

Tirupur 641 602.

7. The Assistant Commissioner of Excise

Tiruppur District

District Collectorate

Tiruppur

8. The Tahsildar

Uthukuli Taluk

Uthukuli.

9. The Deputy superintendent of police

Avinashi

Tiruppur District.

10.The Inspector of Police

Kunnathur Police Station

Kunnathur

Tiruppur District.

Respondent(s)

Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

seeking a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 5 and 6 to

shift the existing TASMAC Liquor Vending Shop located in S.No.108 of

__________

Page 2 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/02/2026 05:51:16 pm )

##PAGE3##

W.P.No.2414 of 2026

Kunnathur Village, Uthukuli Taluk at Kunnathur Town Panchayat to

some other place and consequently forbearing the respondents from

issuing any licence for liquor vending in S.No.108 of Kunnathur Village,

Uthukuli Taluk at Kunnathur Town Panchayat and the nearby areas

which causes disturbances to the general public within the time frame

fixed by this Hon’ble Court.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.N.K.Ponraj

For Respondent(s): Mr. M.Habeeb Rahman Government

Advocate

for Respondents 1, 2, 7 & 8

Mr. S.Vinoth Kumar

Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

for Respondents 4 & 10

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by

the Hon'ble Chief Justice)

Objection to location of existing TASMAC shop is mainly on the

ground that it is located in a densely populated area and causing

inconvenience to the public. Learned counsel for petitioner would

submit that Collector has already forwarded the

complaint/representation to the Tamil Nadu State Marketing

Corporation Ltd.

__________

Page 3 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/02/2026 05:51:16 pm )

##PAGE4##

W.P.No.2414 of 2026

2. From the reading of the affidavit, we do not find that there

is any allegation of violation of statutory provisions contained in

Rule 8 of the Tamil Nadu Liquor Retail Vending (in Shops and Bars)

Rules, 2003 in the matter of the location of TASMAC shop. Except

stating inconvenience, no other ground has been urged.

3. A writ of mandamus can be issued only to perform a

statutory obligation. Since there is no statutory violation, no rule

can be issued. In the case of Hari Krishna Mandir Trust v. State

of Maharashtra [(2020) 9 SCC 356], following observations were

made:

100. The High Courts exercising their jurisdiction under

Article 226 of the Constitution of India, not only have the

power to issue a writ of mandamus or in the nature of

mandamus, but are duty-bound to exercise such power, where

the Government or a public authority has failed to exercise or

has wrongly exercised discretion conferred upon it by a

statute, or a rule, or a policy decision of the Government or

has exercised such discretion mala fide, or on irrelevant

consideration.

...

102. In appropriate cases, in order to prevent injustice to

the parties, the Court may itself pass an order or give

directions which the Government or the public authorities

__________

Page 4 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/02/2026 05:51:16 pm )

##PAGE5##

W.P.No.2414 of 2026

should have passed, had it properly and lawfu

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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top