IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 09-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ AND WMP NO. 52667 OF 2025 M.Mani S/o.Marimuthugounder, Karuppureddiyur Post, Mettur Taluk, Salem District- 636 402.

..Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. The District Collector, Salem District.

2. The Managing Director TASMAC Ltd, CMDA Tower- II, IV Floor, Gandhi Irwin Bridge Road, Egmore, Chennai-600 008.

3. The Senior Regional Manager, TASMAC Ltd, No.56, Brindavan Road, Fairlands, Salem-636 016.

4. The District Manager TASMAC Ltd, 87/5, Sandiyur Village, A.Attaiyampatti Village, Salem-636 203.

5. Govindharaju S/o.Late K.Rajappan, S.No.145/4b1, P.Nalla Goundanpatti, Mettur Taluk, Salem District-

636 402.

6. Madheswari W/o.Rathinam, S.No.145/4a And B, P.Nalla Goundanpatti, Mettur Taluk, Salem District-636402.

7. R.Arun Kumar S/o.Late K.Rajappan, No.1-2-1-3.Mariannan Kaattuvalavu, Pudureddiyur, Karuppureddiyur Post, P.N.Patty Village, Mettur, Salem District- 636 402.

..Respondent(s)

PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order of 1st respondent made in Na.Ka.3753264/ 2025/Ka2, dated 14.10.2025 and quash the same, consequently direct the respondents 1 to 4 to remove or relocate the TASMAC bearing Shop No.7402 attached with bar in Survey No.145/4B1 and 145/6, P Nalla Goundan Patti village, Mettur Taluk, Salem District.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.M.Mathan Raj For Respondent(s): MR.V.Jeevagiridharan,AGP FOR R1 Mr.S.VISWANATHAN, FOR R5 TO R7 MR.M.SEKAR, STANDING COUNSEL FOR R2 TO 4

Order

The present Writ Petition has been filed to call for the records relating to the impugned order of 1st respondent made in Na.Ka.3753264/ 2025/Ka2, dated 14.10.2025 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 4 to remove or relocate the TASMAC bearing Shop No.7402 attached with bar in Survey No.145/4B1 and 145/6, P Nalla Goundan Patti village, Mettur Taluk, Salem District.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the subject TASMAC shop is situated in the agricultural land adjacent to his agricultural land, as a result of which, women agricultural workers are reluctant to work in the surrounding fields including the land belonging to the petitioner. He would further submit that the subject TASMAC shop and bar has become a source of public nuisance and the liquor bottles are littered in the agricultural lands. The TASMAC shop has been illegally set up without complying with the procedure contemplated under the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, in as much as no approval has been obtained for running the TASMAC shop in the agricultural land. He would further submit that despite the fact that in his representation dated 31.05.2025, he had raised a specific plea that the TASMAC shop has been put up in the agricultural land without obtaining appropriate permission, which by itself is impermissible. However, the impugned order does not even deal with the above aspects.

3. The learned Standing Counsel for respondents 2 to 4 would submit that the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.4136 of 2019 dated 06.12.2019, has clarified that it is permissible for putting up the liquor shop in the agricultural land and there is no embargo as such. Having said that, the Division Bench also proceeded to record that however, appropriate permission should be obtained under the law for the time being in force, including a building plan approval, if any, mandated in law. The relevant paragraphs of the said judgment is extracted hereunder:

“12. On the first issue, we have examined the provisions of the 1937 Act and the 2003 Rules and in view of the disclosures made in the affidavits of the fourth respondent, we do not find any such prohibition or restriction of the utilization of premises established/ constructed over agricultural land for the said purpose. The State Government has the power to impose reasonable restrictions that m