P DHARMARAJAN Vs. EXCISE COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is the owner of a building comprised in R.S.No.35/4J of Mannarkkad Village. There is an FL-1 shop of respondents 4 and 5 which is presently located in a building owned by the sixth respondent. Sixth respondent wanted the shop to be shifted. There upon, the petitioner offered his building.

(2.) ACCORDINGLY, the third respondent inspected the premises and made Ext.P1 report which shows that there is a road to the Church of which the seventh respondent is the Vicar and that the distance between the Church and that the shop building offered by the petitioner is only 65 meters. For that reason, by Ext.P4, the offer made by the petitioner was rejected. It is in such circumstances, petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P1 and to direct the third respondent to measure out the distance between the main entrance of the Church and the shop and to reconsider the matter.

(3.) HOWEVER, a reading of Ext.P1 report indicates that the road in question is 12 feet wide and that most of the worshipers use this road for their access to the Church. Therefore, even if the Church has yet another road access, that does not persuade me to think that this road is unimportant for any reason or to eschew the distance now measured by the first respondent and to grant the relief sought for by the petitioner. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed.