Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, P. Pandiyaraj, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents, including the District Collector of Theni District and TASMAC officials, not to open liquor retail shop No.8625 located at S.No.538/1D1A1, Ward No.2, Theni-Cumbam Main Road, Chinnamanur, Uthamapalayam Taluk, Theni District. The petitioner had made a representation dated 27.11.2024 to the authorities, which was not considered. The court, by consent of both sides, took up the writ petition for final disposal at the admission stage. During the hearing, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent reported on instructions that the TASMAC liquor shop had already been opened on 01.01.2025. Consequently, the court observed that the prayer sought in the representation and the writ petition had become infructuous, as the shop was already operational. Since no effective orders could be passed to restrain the opening of the shop, the court closed the writ petition without any order as to costs. The judgment was delivered by a division bench comprising Justice M.S. Ramesh and Justice A.D. Maria Clete on 06.01.2025.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Infructuous Prayer - The petitioner sought a writ to restrain the opening of a TASMAC liquor shop, but the shop had already been opened on 01.01.2025, rendering the prayer infructuous - The court held that no effective orders could be passed and closed the writ petition (Paras 2-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the court can grant a writ of mandamus to restrain the opening of a TASMAC liquor shop when the shop has already been opened.
Final Decision
The writ petition was closed as infructuous since the TASMAC liquor shop had already been opened on 01.01.2025, and no effective orders could be passed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Writ of Mandamus
- Infructuous prayer
- No effective orders
Case Details
2025 LawText (MAD) (01) 391
M.S. Ramesh, A.D. Maria Clete
Mr. P. Chandrasekar (for petitioner), Mr. P. Thilak Kumar (Government Pleader for R1), Mr. S. Sivanesan (Standing Counsel for R2 & R3)
1. The District Collector, Theni District, 2. The Senior Regional Manager, TASMAC, 3. The District Manager, TASMAC
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus to restrain the opening of a TASMAC liquor shop.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought a direction to the respondents not to open liquor retail shop No.8625 and to consider his representation dated 27.11.2024.
Filing Reason
The petitioner apprehended that the TASMAC liquor shop would be opened and sought to prevent it through a writ of mandamus.
Issues
Whether the writ petition seeking to restrain the opening of a TASMAC liquor shop is maintainable when the shop has already been opened.
Submissions/Arguments
The Government Pleader reported that the shop had already been opened on 01.01.2025, rendering the prayer infructuous.
Ratio Decidendi
A writ of mandamus cannot be granted when the prayer has become infructuous due to subsequent events, as no effective orders can be passed.
Judgment Excerpts
The prayer sought for in the representation made by the petitioner as well as in the Writ Petition, to forbear the respondents from opening a TASMAC liquor vending shop No.8625, has become infructuous, since it is reported by the learned Government Pleader on instructions that the shop has already been opened on 01.01.2025.
Since no effective orders can be passed to the prayer sought for in the writ petition, this Writ Petition stands closed.
Procedural History
The writ petition was filed on an unspecified date, taken up for final disposal at admission stage by consent, and closed on 06.01.2025 after the Government Pleader reported that the shop had already been opened.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226
