M/S. SRI MIRRA MEDICALS REP.BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, V. MURUGAN Vs. THE SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF TAMILNADU HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT FORT ST. GEORGE, CHENNAI 600 009 & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.N. Thambi Durai, learned Special Government Pleader accepting notice on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2 and with the consent on either side, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) The petitioner would state that he along with his wife is running a medical shop under the name and style, M/s. Sri Mirra Medicals, situate at No. 90/177, Choolai High Road, Choolai, Chennai-600112, for the past 16 years. It is his case that he got license for running the said shop under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act from the year 2002, by submitting the No Objection Certificate as well as the Lease Agreement from the erstwhile owner. While so, when the petitioner applied for renewal of license to the 2nd respondent, it was rejected on the ground that the petitioner has not submitted the relevant rental agreement. The appeal preferred by the petitioner before the 1st respondent was also dismissed. However, liberty was granted to the petitioner to apply afresh for license with all relevant documents. In the meanwhile, the 3rd respondent, being the subsequent purchaser of the property, refused to receive the rent from the petitioner and hence, the petitioner filed RCOP No. 481/2013 on the file of the learned XV Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai, seeking permission to deposit the rent in Court. Pursuant to the order of the Court below, the petitioner deposited the arrears of rent as well as the future monthly rents in the Court. The 3rd respondent also filed RCOP No. 1329/2014 for eviction on the file of the learned XIII Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai and the same is pending. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition, challenging the proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 15.04.2016, in and by which, the 2nd respondent rejected the application of the petitioner seeking renewal and insisted upon the production of the No Objection Certificate and the Rental Agreement of the 3rd respondent/Landlady.

(3.) At the outset, a careful reading of the impugned order of the 2nd respondent would disclose that the same does not warrant any interference at the hands of this Court for the simple reason that the consent of the landlord/landlady is mandatory in respect of any business to be carried on by the tenant and his/her No Objection Certificate along with the Rental Agreement has to be produced by the tenant while applying for/renewal of the license. In fact, it is a condition precedent too. Further, it is evident that the 2nd respondent has also issued notice to the 3rd respondent calling upon her as to whether she has any objection in the 2nd respondent renewing the license of the petitioner and the 3rd respondent has specifically stated that she has an objection and that she had filed RCOP No. 1329/2014 before the Court concerned for eviction of the petitioner. It is the further case of the petitioner that there exists a dispute between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent.