Facts
The petitioner held a licence from the Thoothukudi District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd. (TDCMPU) to operate an Aavin booth at the old bus stand.
Source reference: pp. 2–6After the old bus stand was demolished, the Corporation provided a temporary site; following construction of a new commercial complex, the petitioner sought a space there to continue operating the booth.
Source reference: pp. 2–6The Corporation did not accede to his request, and he filed this petition under Article 226 seeking consideration of his representation dated 7 October 2023.
Source reference: pp. 2–6TDCMPU supported the request and stated that it had proposed to the Corporation that a shop be allotted to the petitioner
Source reference: pp. 2–6Issues
1. Whether the petitioner could be granted space in the new bus-stand commercial complex to operate an Aavin booth under his TDCMPU licence
Source reference: pp. 6–72. Whether the Corporation was required to consider the petitioner’s request positively notwithstanding its position that no ground-rent space was available and that shops were generally allotted by tender
Source reference: pp. 4–5, 7Law Applied
The petition invoked the High Court’s jurisdiction under Article 226.
Source reference: no citationThe judgment identifies no statutory provision or judicial precedent as the basis for its decision.
Source reference: no citationIt relied on the Corporation’s stated position that space in the shopping complex could be allotted without tender to Central or State Government departments and public-sector undertakings; the Court treated Aavin as a Tamil Nadu State Government undertaking and applied that stated allotment policy to the request
Source reference: p. 7Reasoning
The Court noted that the petitioner’s booth had previously operated under a valid TDCMPU licence and that TDCMPU had recommended allotment of space in the new complex.
Source reference: pp. 4–7Although the Corporation cited traffic constraints and the absence of available ground-rent space, the Court considered that its own stated policy permitted non-tender allotment to government departments and public-sector undertakings.
Source reference: pp. 4–7Because it regarded Aavin as a State Government undertaking, the Court found no impediment to a positive decision on the request
Source reference: pp. 4–7Holding
The Court allowed the writ petition and directed the Corporation to forthwith consider the request positively by allotting a suitable space in the new shopping complex, enabling the petitioner to operate the Aavin booth under his TDCMPU licence.
No costs were ordered; the connected miscellaneous petition was closed
Source reference: p. 7Original Court PDF
Arumugam Krishnakumar .AvsThe Commissioner
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
