RAMANANDA GAS AGENCY Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in this writ petition is seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the notice dtd. 27/02/2017 - 17/08/2017 issued by 2nd respondent in No.Food/CR/41/2016-17 produced at Annexure - D, whereby 2nd respondent in the guise of notice has directed the petitioner to shift the gas godown from the present premises to any another suitable premises.

(2.) The facts leading to filing of this writ petition is that the petitioner is the owner of the land having purchased the converted property in the year 1986 in Sy.Nos.26/2 and 27/2 totally measuring 29.46 mtrs. East-West and 25.9 mtrs. South-West and built up area is 9.10 mtrs.x 6.10 mtrs., safety distance left 10.18 mtrs. x 9.95 mtrs. The petitioner, on purchase of the land on 21/04/1986 obtained licence from the Kalludi Gram Panchayat to construct a LPG Godown for the purpose of carrying on the business and accordingly, licence was granted. It is stated by the petitioner that before obtaining the licence from Kalludy Gram Panchayat, the prime requirement was of obtaining no objection certificate from the Department of Fire and no objection from the Controller, Department of Explosives along with the drawing which was approved by the Deputy Chief Controller of Explosives, Madras on 16/07/1986 and along with the plan permission and the same was obtained by the petitioner. It is stated that Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited issued the dealership appointment letter dtd. 07/08/1986 to the petitioner and the petitioner started its business from 14/08/1986 as per the terms and conditions of letter of agreement as was entered into and the same has been renewed from time to time and the dealership agreement is valid. It is stated by the petitioner that as per the Rule, the building in question has been insured from time to time and the same is valid. The storage capacity of the godown is 8,000 kgs.m of LPG and the validity of the same has been extended which is described in Form No.F produced at Annexure - A wherein the minimum requirement is 7 mtrs. distance from the surrounding area of the godown has to be maintained in accordance with the conditions of the licence issued by the Competent Authority. It is stated by the petitioner that an complaint/representation was lodged by one Prashanth Nagar Nivasigala Abhivruddi Sangha/3rd respondent (hereinafter referred to as "the Sangha" for short) registered on 15/04/2003 which is not in anyway obstructing or causing any nuisance to the public at large and on the same day a representation was also given to the local MLA as per Annexure - B1 and the same has been endorsed by the MLA., whereby the MLA forwarded the representation to 2nd respondent/Tahsildar to examine and take action to change the location of the godown. Based on which, on 10/01/2016, the Deputy Director of Food and Civil Supplies communicated to 2nd respondent to hold enquiry for taking appropriate action as per Annexure - B2.

(3.) Thereafter, the Food Inspector inspected the premises and drawn a mahazar in the presence of the public and also in the presence of the petitioner and recorded a statement of both the parties on the same day and submitted a report to 2nd respondent as per Annexure - C and based on the same, the Tahsildar issued a readymade notice dtd. 27/02/2017 which is again re-dated as 17/08/2017 informing that respondent had orally informed to the petitioner to shift the business premises on 31/12/2016 and therefore directed the petitioner to shift the business premises to the new place where there is no movement of public vide Annexure - D which was received through registered post on 30/08/2017. It is also stated that the petitioner is carrying on the business since 1986 as per the norms prescribed under the Explosives Act by maintaining the minimum distance prescribed under the licensing condition, any license that is going to be issued by the 4th respondent without maintaining the distance norms around the godown premises and more so when the petitioner has maintained the minimum distance of 7 Mtrs. clearly all round the LPG godown, the petitioner cannot be asked to shift the godown premises which is in accordance with the terms and conditions of Explosive License issued by the competent authority. If at all if the 5th respondent was to issue any license for any purpose, the authority competent shall issue license after 7 Mtrs. of the boundary area of the CPM Godown owned by the petitioner without causing public nuisance. If the 4th respondent applies the said principle, none can raise any objection and on the other hand the 4th respondent is unnecessarily making way to the public to raise objections for its fault in issuing the licence as if the petitioner godown premises is coming in the way or causing public nuisance asfor over 32 years the petitioner is carrying on the business. The notice issued by 2nd respondent being illegal and arbitrary and 2nd respondent being the statutory authority cannot act according to the tunes of 3rd respondent who has come into existence in the year 2003 and that any condition have been violated the notice which is issued in the form of an order is not sustainable.