BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:15.09.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR W.P.(MD)No.10376 of 2011 and M.P(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2011 Sharmila Banu :Petitioner -Vs- 1.The Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Arignar Anna Maligai, Tallakulam, Madurai - 2. 2.Mohammed Haniffa 3.Kumar :Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the letter of the third respondent in Ref.No.Ma.Va.4/ 22034/2011 dated 09.09.2011 and quash the same as illegal and consequently, direct the third respondent to issue licence to the petitioner to run fish stall at Door No.1A/1, Alagarkovil Main Road, K.Pudur, Madurai - 7. For Petitioner ... Mr.C.M.Arumugam For Respondents ... Mr.M.Jothi Basu for R.1 R2 & R3 - Dispensed with. ORDER This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the letter of the third respondent in Ref.No.Ma.Va.4/22034/2011 dated 09.09.2011 and quash the same as illegal and consequently, direct the third respondent to issue licence to the petitioner to run fish stall at Door No.1A/1, Alagarkovil Main Road, K.Pudur, Madurai - 7. 2.Heard Mr.C.M.Arumugam, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.Jothi Basu, learned Counsel takes notice for the first respondent. In view of the order that is going to be passed, notice to the respondents 2 and 3 is dispensed with. 3.By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 4.The order under challenge is passed by the first respondent - the Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, refusing to grant licence. As against the said order, an appeal will lie to the Standing Committee in terms of Section 453 of Madurai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1971. 5.In view of the above, the petitioner is entitled to approach the appellate authority and seek for modification of the order including interim relief as may be advised. Accordingly, the petitioner is given liberty to approach the appellate authority and the same shall be dealt with in accordance with law expeditiously. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the authority concerned is free to deal with the matter on its own merit as per law. 6.Granting liberty as above, the writ petition is disposed of Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AS) / TRUE COPY / Sub Assistant Registrar To:The Commissioner,Madurai Corporation,Arignar Anna Maligai,Tallakulam,Madurai2 +1cc to Mr.M.Jothi Basu, Advocate. SR.No.31638. +1cc to Mr.C.M.Arumugam, Advocate. SR.No.31620. Rsb/RP/15.09.11/1P/4C. WP(MD)No.10376 of 2011 and MP(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/