CHENNAI: THE Madras High Court has restrained the authorities from re-auctioning a wine shop in Bangur in Puducherry.Justice T S Sivagnanam, who granted the relief, also directed them to consider the petitioner’s representation dated September 8, 2017 and pass orders on merits and as per law.
The judge was allowing a writ petition from V Kasinathan, who sought to forbear the Excise department in Puducherry from in any manner conducting re-auction of his arrack shop at Bangur in Villianur and consequently direct them to permit him to shift the shop to Ariyur village as per his request dated August 4, 2017 without insisting on kist from July 1, 2017 until reopening of the shop.
Petitioner was allowed to run the shop from July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2018 after accepting his bid for `7.07 lakh by an order dated June 30, 2017. However, following stiff resistance from the locals, he could not run the shop. He submitted a representation on August 4 to the Excise department to permit him to shift the shop to another location.
Meanwhile, one P Pandian had filed a writ petition before this court, which on August 26 passed an interim order directing the authority to close the shops in dispute. Pursuant to this order, three arrack shops, including the one belonging to the petitioner, were closed. However, the petition was dismissed on September 5 on the ground that the petitioner had suppressed material facts and the interim order was also vacated.
Pursuant to this, the department passed an order on September 7, to re-open the three arrack shops with effect from that date. The petitioner submitted a representation on September 8 stating that he could not run the shop in the present location as there was objection and requested for change of location and time for constructing the shop and commencing business. While so, the department brought the shop allotted to the petitioner for re-auction, among other things on the charge that the petitioner had defaulted in making the kist. Hence the present writ petition.
Allowing the petition, the judge pointed out that the petitioner at the very inception on August 4 had expressed his inability to run the shop and requested that he may be permitted to shift the shop to some other location. In the meantime, the writ petition filed by Pandian intervened and the court granted an interim order, owing to which the shop was directed to be closed.