B. SEKAR Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

(2.) Earlier, a batch of writ petitions were disposed in W.P.Nos.27352 of 2021 etc batch vide its order dtd. 31/1/2022, challenging the Tender Notification dtd. 14/12/2021 bearing reference in Na.Ka.No.A3/2242/2021.

(3.) In the aforesaid detailed order, this Court has come to the conclusion that neither the petitioners who are the existing licensees can arm-twist the respondents TASMAC to give business to them under the 2003 Rules nor TASMAC can be seen by giving permissions/licenses for these businesses and thereby allow the consumers to violate Sec. 4A of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937 and since intoxication in public place.