Madras High Court
S.Sakthivel vs The Tamil Nadu State Marketing ... on 6 June, 2016
Author: T.S.Sivagnanam
Bench: T.S.Sivagnanam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 06.06.2016 Coram The Hon'ble Mr.Justice T.S.Sivagnanam Writ Petition Nos.37383 to 37392, 37411 to 37419, 37495 to 37499, 37570, 37599, 37600, 37628 to 37632, 37709, 37731 to 37734, 37911 to 37917, 38010 to 38017, 38020 to 38023, 38033 to 38038, 38044, 38087 to 38092, 38122 to 38125, 38131 to 38136, 38256, 38273 to 38280, 38348, 38351, 38423, 38448 to 38453, 38544 to 38548, 38607 to 38611, 38620 to 38622, 39114 and 39866 to 39869 of 2015 and its respective M.Ps. Writ Petition Nos.37383 of 2015 S.Sakthivel ...Petitioner Vs. 1. The Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited (TASMAC) rep. by its Managing Director, Thalamuthu Natarajan Maaligai Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008. 2. The Senior Regional Manager, The Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation, Limited (TASMAC) L.L.A. Building, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002. ' 3. The District Manager, The Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation, Limited (TASMAC) Kancheepuram ( North) Industrial Estate, Tirumazhisai, Kancheepuram 600 123. ...Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for records, relating to the Bar upset price fixed in the column No.10 of the tender form of the petitioner's shop No.4162, issued by the third respondent and to quash the same, and consequently, to direct the respondents to fix the Bar upset price for the petitioner's shop No.4162 at Rs.1,35,700/-. For Petitioners : Mr.S.Swaminathan For Respondents : Mr.B.Nedunchezian in all W.Ps. COMMON O R D E R
Though the prayer sought for in all these Writ Petitions are varied, yet, the sum and substance of the challenge in these Writ Petitions is to the tender notification issued by Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited (TASMAC) for issuance of the license, in respect of the bars attached to the TASMAC retail vending shops.
2. There has been prolonged litigation between the parties, and pursuant to the interim orders granted in earlier batch of cases, temporary licenses are granted to the petitioners on month to month basis. The benefit of the interim orders has accrued to the petitioners in this batch of cases also.
3. After hearing Mr.S.Swaminathan, the learned counsel appearing for petitioners and Mr.B.Nedunchezian, the learned counsel for respondent/TASMAC, the factual situation that emerges is that, the challenge to the impugned notification has become academic.
4. Admittedly, the impugned notification was issued during the year 2014-15, and the same has been worked itself out. All the petitioners have been granted temporary licence based on the interim orders granted by this Court, and they have been running the shops attached to the TASMAC retail vending shops. Now, the question would be, as to what is the decision, the respondent/TASMAC proposes to take in the matter, is deliberated by the Department, and it would take four months' time to take decision in the matter. This appears to be so, because, recently the Government has taken a policy decision, limiting the number of shops and regulating times. Therefore, the respondent is justified in seeking for four months' time. However, in the interregnum, the interest of the persons, like the petitioners herein, who are licensees, has also to be taken into consideration. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the following order would meet the ends of justice:-
i) The respondent/TASMAC is directed to take a final decision in the matter as regards the fixation of upset price for grant of license to run the bars attached to TASMAC retail vending shops, and such decision shall be taken, as expeditiously as possibly, not later than five months, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
ii) Since the petitioners have had the benefit of the interim orders from this Court, and they have been granted temporary license on month to month basis, this benefit should be permitted to continue in favour of their till the period is over for the current year, viz., 2015-2016, which shall come to an end in November, 2016. Therefore, the petitioners shall be permitted to continue to remit the license fees on monthly basis and temporary license may be granted to the petitioners subject to other fulfillments.
iii) In the event of violation of licence conditions, it is always open to the respondent/Corporation to take appropriate action in accordance with law.
iv) In any event, the benefit of this order would not accrue to the petitioners beyond November, 2016, or as and when, the respondent takes decision as to what manner, the tender notification should be invited, and what should be the upset price.
5. With the above directions and observations, all these Writ Petitions stand disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
06.06.2016 sd Index : yes/no To
1. The Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited (TASMAC) rep. by its Managing Director, Thalamuthu Natarajan Maaligai Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2. The Senior Regional Manager, The Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation, Limited (TASMAC) L.L.A. Building, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.
3. The District Manager, The Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation, Limited (TASMAC) Kancheepuram ( North) Industrial Estate, Tirumazhisai, Kancheepuram 600 123.
T.S.Sivagnanam, J.
sd Writ Petition Nos.37383 to 37392, 37411 to 37419, 37495 to 37499, 37570, 37599, 37600, 37628 to 37632, 37709, 37731 to 37734, 37911 to 37917, 38010 to 38017, 38020 to 38023, 38033 to 38038, 38044, 38087 to 38092, 38122 to 38125, 38131 to 38136, 38256, 38273 to 38280, 38348, 38351, 38423, 38448 to 38453, 38544 to 38548, 38607 to 38611, 38620 to 38622, 39114 and 39866 to 39869 of 2015 06.06.2016