Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Madhan vs The District Manager

Madras High Court|22 November, 2017

JUDGMENT / ORDER

PRAYER in W.P(MD)No.21532/17: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent herein to issue the tender application form to the petitioner herein called for by the respondent herein for running the bar attached with the TASMAC shop No.9984 and 9929 for the period comprising from 01.12.2017 to 30.11.2018 as per the respondents news paper notification in Na.Ka.No A4/486/2017 dated 03.11.2017.
PRAYER in W.P(MD)No.21533/17: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent herein to issue the tender application form to the petitioner herein called for by the respondent herein for running the bar attached with the TASMAC shop no 9951 for the period comprising from 01.12.2017 to 30.11.2018 as per the respondents news paper notification in Na.Ka.no A4/486/2017 dated 03.11.2017.
PRAYER in W.P(MD)No.21534/17: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent herein to issue the tender application form to the petitioner herein called for by the respondent herein for running the bar attached with the TASMAC shop No.9953 for the period comprising from 01.12.2017 to 30.11.2018 as per the respondents news paper notification in Na.Ka.No. A4/486/2017 dated 03.11.2017.
!For Petitioners :Mr.N.Mohideen Basha For Respondent :Mr.B.Jameel Arasu, Standing Counsel (In all petitions) :COMMON ORDER As the issue involved in all these petitions are similar in nature, they are disposed of by this common order.
2. By consent, these writ petitions are taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.
3. Alleging that the respondent authorities are not providing the tender application, for running the bar attached with the TASMAC shops, these petitions came to be filed by the respective petitioners, seeking a direction to the respondent to provide the tender application to them.
4. On the other hand, Mr.B.Jameel Arasu, learned Standing Counsel, who takes notice for the respondent, stoutly refuted the same and fairly submitted that as and when the petitioners approach the authorities, necessary tender application would always be provided to them.
5. Such being the case, leaving it open to the petitioners to approach the authorities, these writ petitions are closed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
To The District Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC), 104-C, SIPCOT Campus, Thoothukudi ? 8.
.
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Madhan vs The District Manager

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
22 November, 2017