M. VEERABHATHIRAN Vs. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Writ Petition has been filed praying that this Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus to forbear the respondents from opening a TASMAC Shop and bar, at No. 134, Triplicane High Road, Triplicane, Chennai. The petitioner has stated that the second respondent had conducted the tender for the grant of a bar licence for opening a bar at the TASMAC wine shop No. 833, at No. 131, Triplicane High Road, Triplicane, Chennai, during the month of May, 2011. The petitioner has participated in the tender and had quoted Rs.4,07,000/ -as the tender amount. Since, the tender amount of the petitioner was the highest, the licence had been granted in his favour, subject to the petitioner depositing the security deposit and one month licence fee. As the petitioner had complied with the said conditions, the third respondent had issued the licence, dated 16.05.2011, to the petitioner, to sell eatable items and to collect the empty bottles from the bar attached to the TASMAC shop, for the period from 16.05.2011.Based on the license issued by the third respondent, the petitioner has been carrying on the business of supplying eatable items and collecting empty bottles from the bar attached to the TASMAC shop. Whileso, the respondent had shifted the TASMAC shop from Arumbakkam to No. 134, Triplicane High Road, Triplicane, Chennai, thereby adversely affecting the interest of the petitioner.

(2.) IT is further stated that the licence fee of the petitioner had been fixed, based on the average sales that had taken place in the shop in question, for a period of twelve months. Whileso, locating another TASMAC shop close to the TASMAC shop, relating to which the petitioner had been granted the license, is arbitrary and illegal. It is further stated that the opening of the said TASMAC shop is contrary to the tender condition No. 1 of the terms and conditions of the tender, based on which the petitioner had been granted the license. Therefore, the petitioner had stated that the location of a new shop at No. 134, Triplicane High Road, Triplicane, Chennai, is arbitrary and illegal and as such the respondents should be restricted from opening the new shop.

(3.) PER contra, the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that there is no prohibition in the terms and conditions of the tender, for the opening a new shop close to the shop relating to which the licence had been granted to a particular party. Even though the licence fee had been fixed in respect of the shop concerned, based on the average sales for a period of 12 months, there is no specific prohibition for the opening of another shop close to the shop which the licence had already been granted.