Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Recording the above submission, the writ petition stands dismissed as infructuous with liberty to the petitioner to workout the remedy for refund of the amounts paid to the respondents
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Recording the above submission, the writ petition stands dismissed as infructuous with liberty to the petitioner to workout the remedy for refund of the amounts paid to the respondents.
Judgment
W.P.No.4071 of 2024IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 24.10.2025CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN W.P.No.4071 of 2024andW.M.P.Nos.4394 & 4395 of 2024 N.Murugan... Petitioner Vs.
The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd.,4th Floor, Thalamuthu Nadarasan Maligai, Egmore, Chennai – 8.
The District Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd.,Kancheepuram (North)Kancheepuram District.
G.Ramamoorthy ... RespondentsPrayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of 2nd respondent made in Na.Ka.No.787/A3/2023 dated 22.01.2024 and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to issue license in favour of the petitioner to run the bar attached to TASMAC wine shop No.4086, ____________Page No. 1 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.4071 of 2024situated at No.1/31, Muthu Mariamman Koil Street, Manimangalam Village, Chengalpet. For Petitioner: No appearanceFor Respondents: Mr.K.Balakrishnan Government Advocate (TASMAC) (For R1 & R2) Mr.N.Shanmuga Thayumanavan (For R3)ORDERThe writ petition has been filed to quash the order dated 22.01.2024 made in Na.Ka.No.787/A3/2023, passed by the 2nd respondent and also to direct the 2nd respondent to issue license in favour of the petitioner to run the bar attached to TASMAC wine shop No.4086, situated at No.1/31, Muthu Mariamman Koil Street, Manimangalam Village, Chengalpet.2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner.____________Page No. 2 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.4071 of 20243. The learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 and 2 submits that the license has been given to H2/third respondent on 06.10.2025 as the petitioner failed to comply with the tender conditions and therefore, bar License earlier issued to the petitioner has been cancelled and re-allotted to the third respondent. Therefore, no further adjudication is required in the present writ petition.
Operative part
Recording the above submission, the writ petition stands dismissed as infructuous with liberty to the petitioner to workout the remedy for refund of the amounts paid to the respondents.
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.24.10.2025Neutral Citation : Yes / NoIndex: Yes/NoSpeaking order/Non-Speaking orderkakTo:1.The Managing Director,____________Page No. 3 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.4071 of 2024 Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd.,4th Floor, Thalamuthu Nadarasan Maligai, Egmore, Chennai – 8.2.The District Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd.,Kancheepuram (North)Kancheepuram District.____________Page No. 4 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.4071 of 2024C.SARAVANAN, J.kakW.P.No.4071 of 2024 24.10.2025____________Page No. 5 of 5
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Recording the above submission, the writ petition stands dismissed as infructuous with liberty to the petitioner to workout the remedy for refund of the amounts paid to the respondents
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.